This gallery contains 134 images @ 13 megapixels. Sign up now to see them all!


Wow, it took you 30 shots before you could look into the camera. Too bad!

This is kind of an odd set. Here we have a very talented and popular model but the interaction with the photographer/viewer is almost non-existent....maybe 10 shots out of 134 with eye contact. If I didn't know better, I'd guess this is one of those multiple-photographer sets and the model is alternating looks at the different photographers in the room. Or perhaps there is also a video shoot in progress... Yes, Catherine/Angelica is beautiful and poses very, very well, but without the interaction this set just doesn't do her or her Met-Art fans justice. Sorry.

Well, I don't know what you think gives you the right to speak for all MET ART fans because I think that some of the models look at the camera way too much. The models are not your cousin at a family picnic or an actress on the red carpet at the Oscars, and they shouldn't always be smiling or looking at the camera like they are at one of these functions because doing so doesn't do the models or their MET ART fans justice.

I find it a nice change of pace that this model didn't look at the camera for nearly every shot. I know some of you hate variety in these galleries, but there are a lot of us who find it a refreshing change of pace from the same-old same-old.

Best lips on the whole dang website!

I never tire of seeing beautiful Katherine and her delicious body...especially in a flowered dress!

Katherine is a beautiful woman and I'm always glad to see more of her. But it's weird to have her looking away from the camera in so many images. It's like there were two photographers shooting her and she decided to give the other guy the most attention.

It's funny that somebody tagged this one "girl next door" given that Katherine usually triggers the nutty "OMG OMG I can't stand it, there's a porn star on my favorite porn site!" responses.

Looks like YOU are the one she "triggered" today.... Why even talk about or mention it?? It is what it is!

No, it was the tag that triggered the comment.

Y'all can call it whatever you want, but show this site to 10,000 random people and 9,000+ will answer "Yes" to "Is this a porn site?" When the models spread their legs as wide as they often do here, it's porn - and there's nothing wrong with that at all.

  • Doug
  • 2 months ago:

They call it soft-core...

It seems some models just don't wanna have sex in public, while others do.

And depending on how a viewer feels about that -- or perhaps whether he or she would or not -- I suppose has a lot to do with their feelings about certain models.

As a hardcore porn consumer I'm glad for the models who do! But I can't imagine any one of them being my "cup o' tea" in other ways :-)

It really is all in the mind... :-)
To some extent, anyway! :-)))

Funny, I def. see the distinction between "soft core" and "hard core." But I still don't see a distinction between "erotic photography" and porn.
Again, that's not judgmental or condemnatory in any way, either to the actors or to the consumers of porn. But to me, porn is porn. It differs in degree, but not in substance.

  • Doug
  • 2 months ago:

Some of my pics of KL are definitely pornographic, though not "hard-core"* of course. But my faves perhaps are lovely romantic portraits...

*if you know what I mean, and maybe you don't :-)

As somebody said, you know porn when you see it :-)

It is sexual for her to show herself like that, yet she isn't actually "having sex" -- I guess that's the difference.

  • Doug
  • 2 months ago:

Too late! :-)))

Ha ha! I noticed the averted gaze thing and the "girl next door" thing as well...
I for one hope we're over the shaming models for their porn work.
Like you imply, I don't really see much difference between nude modeling and porn.
And I don't mean that in a bad way.
As the radio Jock Mike Malloy always says, "no disrespect to sex workers." Everyone has to do something to support themselves, and some people enjoy sex, even sex on camera.
And a LOT of us like to watch ~ so how the hell are we any better than them, how are they any worse than us? Not that I think either the actresses/actors or the consumers should be ashamed, it's just human sexuality ferhevinsake.

My take on this subject is that it really doesn't matter. As Doug said it's 99% imagination. It is what you choose to perceive that counts. All this shame on you attitude is BS. If a girl decides to do nude modeling it does NOT mean she is promiscuous or that she would do porn and porn is just a job as stated. In fact it can be grueling work and being pounded for hours in front of half a dozen people while a director shouts move this try that, cum for us baby can't be fun. Sure sex can be great fun but but it isn't a audience participation sport. Some of those dudes and dudets aren't even hetero. It's all illusion. That blazing hot 10 min. sex scene might have consumed an entire day of shooting. After all there aren't that many guys that can keep that kind of pace for very long. Just because a girl has chosen to do porn to make some bucks doesn't mean she is doing any more than most women will do to get a man or that most of us do in our own bedrooms. Or at least fantasize doing. We all sell our bodies in some way or another. It's called work and it's required unless you were born wealthy.

  • Doug
  • 2 months ago:

I'll agree with you in that if we knew one of these "sex workers" personally we might have some sympathy for them, -- they'd no longer be just a bod.*
What gets me is that I can usually sense who is and who isn't -- or at least who is....
KL please don't prove me wrong! :-)))))))

The old heartbreak test is in effect! :-)))

When you think they can break your heart, you're in trouble! :-)

*think of "Boogie Nights" :-)

  • Doug
  • 2 months ago:

Huge difference between nude modeling and porn!

OMG, as bibblefuzz :-) sez!

Just think what you are saying there, and then let your imagination go.

Mine sees a majorly huge difference! :-)


No intent to shame here, but I can't think of one MA porn star who is remotely close to being my cup o' tea.

To each their own!

As Rylsky might say,

peace be with u :-)))

BTW, as I've said before, my true cup o' tea here has amounted to my salvation from porn. I on occasion will still indulge in it, but nothing is better, nothing compares to indulging in my cup o' tea :-)

Would that tune change if you were to suddenly discover that your "Cup O' Tea" is an "anal angel" as well?? I mean...unless you are intimately acquainted with her, how can you be sure of ANYTHING? Maybe some 'long-dong brute' is tapping her for film on a weekly basis...? ;o)) ))

  • Doug
  • 2 months ago:

I wonder the same Rock. I think about it a lot, believe me.
In fact I was just thinking about it.*
I don't know, it's just a sense I have about her.
Maybe it's a projection. Something familiar -- literally -- that I imagine in error.
Imagine -- it's all imagination :-)

And I've waited and am waiting to be disillusioned -- to see the unhappy truth. In more ways than just what we're talking about.

Looks can deceive, but they can also tell the truth :-)

*who is this babe, really :-?

As John Mitchell said, never mind what we say, watch what we do :-)))

I do believe you... And accept your response as sincere and honest. A refreshing change of pace...;o)

  • Doug
  • 2 months ago:

Oh, luv ain't no laughin' matter.
No joke! :-))

What am I doin' fallin' for an internet glam model?
Who would have thunk it possible :-?

Shows ya ya never know. You can look back and see how it happened, but looking forward -- unthinkable! :-)

  • Doug
  • 2 months ago:

In any event, KL so far has kept us guessing, kept it discreet. That in itself is something I like.
Probably won't know anything more ever than that, so I'm free to keep dreaming :-)))

  • Doug
  • 2 months ago:

Just pleeze don't go breakin' my ♥! :-)))

Doug, I've fallen in love with so many women in real life I think I've finally reached a point in my life where my heart is just tough enough not to fall the way it used to. I still love women for what they are, I still idealize and idolize them ~ but in an abstract way, not a vulnerable personal way. Will I ever fall in love again? I suppose that depends in part on if I ever feel worthy of being fallen in love with again ~ which I don't see happening tomorrow or the day after tomorrow, so I don't dwell on it. I'm happy enough to admire from afar for right now and let life unfold. Once I'm not in constant crisis anymore maybe there'll be time enough for love again... if I'm lucky. ( :
As for you, you're enough of an idealist that I definitely see love in your destiny someday. With a woman who can love you back, I mean. ( :

  • Doug
  • 2 months ago:

To me falling in love doesn't have anything to do with the other person falling in love with me :-)
BTW, they say that often when you fall for that other person they fall in love with you too...
In their own way of course :-)
I really wish I had seen things that way -- had had the confidence it might have imparted -- earlier in my life :-)

Katherine is "a sight for sore eyes."
That is all. ( :

  • Doug
  • 2 months ago:

No it ain't :-))



  • H WU
  • 2 months ago:

Her anus and pussy closeup is awesome.

excellent set. i love Katherine.

Access The Full Set Of 134 Images By Joining MetArt Today!