This gallery contains 98 images @ 10 megapixels. Sign up now to see them all!


Really attractive model, but strange set of photos. Would have loved to see her beautiful breasts in focus. Afew closeups of her would have had garnered this set more support. Why the grainy pictures?


There's no way in hell this is a new and current set. It's gotta be an old archive set from the 1990's they accidentally slipped into the mix. No modern-day 30+ megapixel camera owner in their right mind would purposefully go out of their way to create pictures this pixelated, blurry and ugly.

Put aside the blurry, 1978 penthouse style photography of Stuart , the model was just out of metart norm enough to be really interesting. She is really lean, great stomach, tits, arms, and the ever-rare natural bush. Lets give the model another shoot with another photographer. One big selling point of the metart site is incredibly beautiful models shot in HD. So many really interesting models never seem to make it past one or two obscure sets and some we see multiple times each month. Bring Leonada back soon and in-focus for round two please

Please, no more like this.

Roy, are you lying about the 33 megapixel rig? I haven't seen this much grain on photos since I shot with Ektachrome 1600 back in 1960. I would've loved to have seen this woman's body in high-def glory but instead you found a way to hide it behind all that graininess. Jeeze.

I love the model. I wish the set had been longer.

Potentially a very beautiful young woman that could have been presented much better. As it is someone needs to find her some help for whatever they have her on. Not good. We do care that these young women appear of their free will without drugs, alcohol, or anything that would be against their will or desire. As an industry leader Met-Art should set a better standard by refusing photos from anyone that appear to be of a model that may be abused. The competition, not that there is any, should follow such a lead.

hm, where to start?
The pics themselves, looking like they were shot with a cheap camera from 2003?
A girl looking like she didn't have a shower in the last 12 days?
The extreme blurriness?

No, I think it is a combination of the three. The setting itself, girl crawls out of a crate, poses and crawls back is nice. Seriously.

But the rest is crap. I am sorry. I am not adamant on pussyshots or pussy always in focus. I like settings others than girl-in-bedroom. But this is just so bad in every way. I can't find anything redeeming quality about it.

Stuart sets works on us like we were together with the model and made some snapshots by ourselves. It's a change to the perfection trimmed sets.

I don't mind that at all. I just don't like the dither, or schiesser. or whatever you want to call it.

And I don't like that this absolutely stunning girl gets such low marks for the photographers decisions...

The girls should never be rated according to the photographic taste of us. By the way, something reminds me about the body and nude sets of the unvarnished young Madonna. But: Which quacksalvers scratched this girl - or is it selfmade bodyart?

Whatever Leonda was drinking/smoking/shorting, she needs to change brands. Sorry, honey, I hate to post negative reviews, but this set is a bummer.

Monoton shoot filtering..... Be more creative, please.....!

  • 2 years ago:

The legend returns, though he may find the audience here quite different from the one he left all those years ago.

Stuart is an acquired taste--you have to have enough repetition of his sets to understand what he's trying to accomplish; raw eroticism as explored from the viewers perspective, without the flowery fantasy structures we build up. His shots are eloquent satires of ourselves, while acknowledging the sheer sexual tension within.

His work is certainly polarizing--you either love it, or hate it. I fall in the "love it" category.

and for that we need to endure disgusting models and low quality images?

  • 2 years ago:

I take it the model was not to your liking. This is fair, no beauty is a beauty to all. As for the quality of the images, the soft focus/blur is a staple of Stuart's. I think it's his intent to capture the indistinct and fleeting nature of "the moment". It doesn't always work, but when it does it has the effect of appearing as a memory as opposed to something you're presently viewing. It is definitely a purposeful style.

It is not about 'beauty'. This girl looks like she hasn't had a shower in weeks. If you like fatty, unkempt hair. Fine. I don't.

A thought provoking analysis... I find myself coming back here, looking for what it is that you and others are seeing that others of us do not... And I'm now wondering if sets like this were at the root of MetArt's birth... If that's the case, the "glamorous" aspect of nude photography has certainly taken over, and maybe that IS a shame considering the number of sites that focus exclusively on "glamor" and ignore ANY "artistic" aspect of the female form in any given setting. I also wonder if this set is several years old, and pulled out just to give us something...'different' for a change....(?) The more I look, the less I'm repulsed... The "scar-toos" are something I haven't seen before, and I will do some research on them... I'm pretty sure it's a "French" thing, and I'm pretty sure I prefer "ink"...;o)
Everybody have a great weekend!! :o) (Now to today's offerings...)

I don't mind saying that this is got to be the worst sets I can remember, and I've been a member almost two years. I have not scored one this low in recent history. There is nothing here that appeals to me, some aspects are even repulsive (like the scar tattoos). Sorry Roy, whatever you were trying to do here does not connect with me.

Not so familiar with scar tattoos. Given the condition she appears to be in could be she was branded. Certainly hope not. Someone should check on her. It is like seeing someone who may be abused and doing nothing about it. Step up Met-Art.

i have been member for 15 years. this is one of the bad sets on met art. bad settings and very bad posing for a beautiful model

Pretty girl and clever premise. I should have realized she is French when I saw Jim Morrison on flag.

No comments .... ):

Oh c'mon Caballo...you don't wanna jump into this can of worms!!? LOL

Fantastic black box!

There is much to like here. (I really don't care if anyone disagrees, I just feel this set needs a break from very negative comments). I always liked Roy Stuart's photosets in Leg Show magazine, back when it still existed, and this set has many elements that Roy's fans appreciate. Also, there is some artistic, social, or political statement going on perhaps with the Jim Morrison American flag, which is draped over a cardboard box (pseudo coffin?), which Leonda crawls into. This makes you think. There have also been cruel words written about the model, but I know that if I were present at this photo shoot, I wouldn't be able look away.

I'm glad you took some time to reflect on the positive qualities of the model. It's a trip imagining time with Leonda A and the circumstances that might pull you into that scene. It would have to be a strange trip. Still, I'm not grounded when men use negative language when describing photo sets of young naked women; I don't understand it. What is the point? If through some happy stroke of fate I was dropped down in photo #80, it's not like I would say "None for me, thanks... Perfectly dreadful." She has an outstanding body - a sexy petit choux. Maybe it's a British thing?

The Jim Morrison American flag was in a set a few years ago, back in January 30, 2005. See page 4 of "Roy Stuart's Amateur". I'm bewildered the veteran commentators don't remember such an odd thing. Still, I'm hoping it does not show up again and would spring for a Jimmy Hendrix version, if that will help. I'm not sure what, if anything, Roy Stuart is trying to say concerning the HP LaserJet Pro 400 Color M451nw or it's relationship with this flag. It's not really the point, but there are a lot of aspects of the shoot that raise questions though and, of course, it plays off a previous set. So it's a little more curious and interesting than some. Probably best not to over think it, when that fantastic Gallic ass presents itself too you.

  • 2 years ago:

I saw the printer box/American flag as an allegory for American tendency to sell sex, while at the same time keep it boxed, hidden and controlled. It's hilarious that my country is one of the most sexually modest nations yet it routinely leads the world in porn consumption. Think about that for a moment. The US is the birthplace of the axiom "sex sells!" ... But, hey! Don't talk about it! Or think about it. Or have it!

It's a very bizarre hypocrisy.

You said it better than I did!

Thank you!

Well why is this piece of trash on MetArt?

I don't like hairy arm pits and pussies and for sure don't like black, baggie eyes to add to the charm.

I don't even know why I am taking the time to write my thoughts about this garbage?

Ok, let the hairy crowd and unemployed chime in and blast my artistic comments! :)

99% of nude models on sites such as this are totally shaven. So quit your bitchin' about the measly 1% of the pics that aren't!!

Hairy? Hey, she's French. What did you expect?

I'm all for variety, and doing something quirky like the box is sort of a fun idea. But wow, technically these are horrible! Many are out of focus, does he need to use a tripod? Or maybe strobes would help, some of the softness seems to be from camera movement. It's a pity, she's a lovely girl.

Her stomach is a work of art. Stunning.

Her body is hot, but since I am not a European, all I can hope for is that someone shows her how to shave. I understand that there are many that find that "natural" look appealing, but I am in the majority that does not. I have become accustomed to the smooth skinned and hairless female body. I would love to see a set with this girl shaved and in focus.

as an european I am insulted that you think that hairy = european.

This girl is just a mess. She needs a shower, some industrial strenght soap and therapy.

That's the hottest unkept, ragged, insane looking chic with scarification tats that I've seen today.

REALLY liked the way the photog had the model crawl out of a cardboard box on the floor like a victim from a horror movie.

Literally, an unbelievable set from Met-Art.

Don't. Stop.

Thought you said unbearable at first.

None for me, thanks... Perfectly dreadful.

First of all, nothing negative should ever be said to any model on any modeling site. The way our worlds ideas of beauty works as a whole is cold and ruthless. Have you no respect for feelings. She doesn't fit your style fine, best keep it to yourself.
Leonda don't take there comments seriously, they obviously don't see what makes a woman truelly beautiful. you are pretty because you are natural, and your eyes are beautiful.

Let me put it another way, Roy Stuart shouldn't be a nude model photographer. I'm sure if Leonda wanted to work with a more proffesional photographer, she would have more a chance of good attention. It's really the awkward theme of the set and the sadness that makes it unfavorable, not the model herself.

And I don't really like seeing self inflicted scars either, such a sad world we live in.

Quick, notify the news media. Neil, Rockhard and uuusssee all agree. This set is dreadful. Stuart as such a great reputation, I realy want to get him, but he is not for me.

If this is typical of his work, I'm glad I can say that I've never heard of him... And you're correct Neil, it's a rare occasion that we three agree... I'm a Morrison fan and never noticed, through the 'funk', that he's on that flag!! lmao I'm usually focused on the model....and in this set, it was like watching a train wreck....I couldn't look away! Until pg 3 that is, when I ran like hell! ;o) I can see he was making a point, I just can't see what it is... And the model, although pretty, doesn't appeal to me a bit in this 'state of refinement'. I can only hope for her sake that she is portraying a character in his 'vision'...

This is the set that prompted my post a day or so later to deltagamma74. It has nothing to do with censorship. It is all about models who "appear" to be in a life that is a "train wreck". I worked in international media and saw how exploitation is very real in some parts of the world. More than a little sensitive to the subject. Don't believe any of us support such.
Best to you. Cease fire.


Dreadful! That's the right word.

I agree with all the compliments on the model. I especially love her hairy arm pits and bush. I gave her a 10, but the shoot a low score for these reasons. Too many pics don't show anything, and this is especially wasteful in a small shoot. And too many blur out her arm pits. If you are going to have an unshaven model (which I love by the way), show the hair, don't be ashamed of it. Finally, the grainy images are abhorrent. Use a camera that is good enough for the light please! There is no excuse for a technical error like that on a site like this.

junkies on met now...a new level!

Great to see a Roy Stuart set after so long. His French models & scenarios are so natural & so very sexy. Hairy pussies & tight panties ready for the wash basket!

Hope we don't have to wait so long till the next set..

Please, more like this.

I am trying to find something to like about Roy Stuart's style. Try as I might he is just not for me. I realize Stuart enjoys a noted reputation, but I do not get it. His photos remind me of everything I hated about France. I think Roy Suart's best work to ever appear on MetArt was the hard bound photo book the amazingly beautiful Gillian was holding on her lap in her photo set Krullen, a tribute to Stuart. I understand that many people like Stuart's work. I wish them well, but I'm out of here.

Roy Stewarts style is models with hairy pussies.

One of the most unique girls I've seen in quite a while.Lovely breast! More photos with the cat in it, would have been fun. More of her, please!

I do not know the name of the official style of the photos. I would simply say they are out of focus or soft. I do not like these photos at all. Love the model

The style is called: "I'm using the same old 5-mega pixel camera I bought back in 1998 when Met started"

The style is called scheisser, a la late 50s early 60s.

Beautiful model! Hits all my must haves: alluring eyes, great stomach, toned arms and legs. Cute butt. But that soft dithered texture overlay ruins the zoom-in. What? WHAT? Please don't be so artsy. Just give us great photos.

With some direction by the photog, this could have been a highly charged & erotic pictorial. Too many of the poses are faceless, or looking away from the camera, or eyes shut. A recurring theme (read: problem) with MetArt.

  • 2 years ago:

I hope she returns soon! Great butt and gorgeous hips. Very attractive but I'd like more pics when she's looking at the camera.

Great body and, umm...let's see, what else?...hmm...oh, okay, sets a new standard for fewest in-focus photos. So it's got that going for it, which is nice.

Contrary to the current consensus for Leonda I like her very much. That probably accounts for most of why I like the set more than the consensus also. The reasons I like Leonda? Glass cutters, and clearly visible through her bra; simple cotton panties like ladies wore back in the day, hair where whichever creator you worship intended, and a bubble butt. Roy certainly lead the way, back then, in finding and coaxing ladies to take off their clothes for us to admire, Gentlemen start your engines.

I like that with Roy Stuart one can see a woman with her feet flat on the ground (instead of always on tip-toe), but he always goes too far with his attempt to give his viewers the natural girl. Beauty is still important and he seems to delight in depriving his viewers of it. In this set, I found myself much more compelled to admire the room than the model in it. And since this is not a website devoted to beautiful architecture, that's just wrong.

For me it was the cutting scars. I could handle the hairy pits (I'm not a fan but it's also not a deal-breaker) but for a site whose tagline is "where flawless beauty meets art" I want to be able to focus on that beauty, not the model's life issues. She's very pretty - I even favorited a few of those shots - but seriously, the scars were a bit too much for my taste. You want to show that stuff? Sell your portfolio to SuicideGirls, not MetArt.

They're not cuttings: they're thread modifications.

Human beings have engaged in self-adornment since before recorded history. I found this artful and different, and it's her body. AND thread modifications can be removed far more simply than tattoos can.

Amen to that brother! That's exactly where this set belongs, SuicideGirls.

I never knew there was such a thing as SuicideGirls. What does it say that rainnwynd knows about it and kilroy endorses the sentiment?

More Leonda and more French women please!

I have a fetish for french women and this one is a heart stopper. As I viewed her natural sensuality I fantasized the sound of her voice with a deep sexy french accent. I am disappointed that her early ratings are so low, not because I care what others think but because I fear she will not appear again. More Leonda and more french women please.

Well,im posting for the second time,because my first post dissapeared.If i did something wrong,Ok,but if
It was censored,i consider it a shame.
I was talking about the eroticism in this set,a smoking hot French girl with a natural look.No lolitas,no back tied
Or short hair,no gymnastics,no mini tits,no hairless pussy,not the same all glories every day,just for one day.
And i was talking about this as a flashback to better days,when Met was all that was,not the mighty and
Resource consuming Met art network

Just for today,congratulations and thanks

The seller

@gswkJu We do not censor.

I agree with your first comment and gave a thumbs up. Patience grasshopper, the posts do show up.

Hi Met

Its great to login and find something like this set,just for one day.Real eroticsm,a smoking hot French
Girl,so natural that i can feel her smell from my desk.Just for one day,no lolitas,no gymnastic poses,no
Tied back or short hair,no tiny tits,no hairless pussy,no fucking outdoor sets and,above all,something
Different to the same old glories that the page features daily.This is a flashback of better days in Met,
When all that was was Met,not the huge and resource consuming Met art network.

Just for one day,congratulations and thanks

The seller

wow, more of this natural beauty please.

Raw eroticism, welcome back Roy Stuart .

Access The Full Set Of 98 Images By Joining MetArt Today!