So gorgeous, clothed or nude.
Stunning. That is all.
I have said before, I really like sets when the model is fully clothed for a few shots. This set is the perfect example. Why? I dunno. Anyone else feel that way or is it just me?
for a few shots or a page good. but not for 5 pages out of 7.
Nope, it's not just you! All Naked All The Time sets bore me, even of the most beautiful models. Starting the model out in some clothing she'd actually wear in real life gives us a feel for the model as a real woman, and starting her out in some nice fancy lingerie gives us a fantasy of the end of a perfect date with a stunningly beautiful woman. Starting her out with nothing on at all is kinda like turning the loudspeaker all the way up to "10" immediately. There's nowhere else to go and it gets boring after awhile.
You can always go "one louder" :-)
I agree :-)
Bretons your woman parts are perfection. So lovely. Just a personal request if you'd consider a bit of womanly fur, nicely trimmed. Ty...
I think this is one of the longest -- if not THE longest -- strip sequence ever on Met. 99 out of 127 photos.
I love sets like this where the girl is fully and nicely dressed in the beginning and then slowly reveals all. Of course, it helps if the girl is as beautiful as Bretona :)
Great set, great woman, great photographer. For me make sets like this much fun: you see the girl removing her clothes. That is teasing. If you see the girl from the beginning nude, she lost al lot of her personality - and the viewer has less thrill. Hope you will make more like this.
A pre-Raphaelite stunner...!
Bretona and Albert Varin hit the jackpot. 10 all around
This is another very pleasing collaboration between Albert and Bretona. I always look forward to their work.
I have just a couple of comments. Bretona certainly is wearing a lot of blush on her cheeks.
The tags continue to grate on my nerves. If it's not the vigilance required to remove inferences of anal practices that will NEVER appear on MET, a new pair has popped up. Some FOOL has tagged this gallery with : “shave please” and “too hairy” So far as I can see, that would require Bretona to remove her eyebrows and all the hair on her head.
I submit that it is time, and long past, for tags to also pass a test of truth. It's a pity but maybe tags should be removed in entirety, unless the new system can cope better than the classic does.
First, good points, all.
I’ve noticed that some of the tags link to models that have not been tagged with that particular word or phrase. For example, Bretona has been tagged with, “marry me.” “Marry me” also calls up 5,010 galleries, with Cualy being one of the models that has, supposedly, been tagged with ‘marry me.’ Yet, on Cualy’s bio page, as well as each of her three galleries, “marry me” is nowhere to be found. (Additionally, “marry me” also generates a notice from M/A, stating, “There is no model named Marry Me.” Good info…..I guess…..but I could have figured that out on my own.) So, if tags link to models that have not been tagged with that word, the tag system appears to be (somewhat) broken.
Thanks for reading.
Good day, BaggyPants and everybody else!
Since you mentioned tags, and I love the curation that can go along with tagging, I must argue that I think that it would be a great waste to discard them outright.
I agree that some tags are absurd, others disrespectful, and yet others patently misleading. However, there could be a tag section, quite simple to design, where inappropriate tags can be reported and removed, and other tags suggested and added. I would especially enjoy if tags could be expanded to include more technical terms (i.e., 'chiaroscuro', 'filter', 'saturated') as well as to included some that are missing without any clear reason (why do we have 'beautiful long hair' and not 'beautiful short hair', for example? why is there no 'biting lip' or 'beautiful waist' or 'winking' for that matter?).
Personally, tags help me find some of the excellent older content in the website that I would never be able to find only with the search function - simple or advanced - when I'm feeling whimsical. What other way could I find those beauties that have delighted us while sporting a sexy 'ponytail' or bathing under a 'waterfall' or unfastening their 'corset'?
I understand what you mean, BaggyPants, by how the tags are often abused in a childish way, but I hope that the tags aren't discarded, only updated and improved so that we can continue to the website to its utmost.
Hi Zyniker, and thanks for your comment. You're absolutely right that tags would be a wonderful asset if they're used properly. I wish they hadn't devolved into the mess they are now. I personally would love it if they were objective and accurate, so I could look for all sets with, say, robes, or bikinis, or baby oil (or bottomlessness, hooray!). It would be a tremendous undertaking for MET to re-tag all of their thousands and thousands of sets, though. Here's to hoping!
I've never paid attention to or used the tags but I'm confused - how do the stupid tags detract from the usefulness of the non-stupid ones?
For instance, this set is tagged with "denim". Still works fine to find denim in sets, regardless of also being tagged with "makes me cum".
Even when the tags are reasonably objective, they're incomplete. Just now, as a random example, I picked a gallery from 2004:
Alissa, the model in this set, in various photos wears a robe, a hat, a white thong, black panties, is on a couch, wears a translucent dress, and conceals herself behind curtains. She has long brunette hair and a trimmed and shaped patch of pubic hair. Tags that identify these facts would be helpful.
Instead we get: awesome bush, gorgeous ass, hairy, hairy pussy, hot body, long hair, lovely bush, more please, natural beauty, never shave, panties, real woman, thick bush, wonderful bush
Okay, but that's still not a problem with the stupid tags, it's that there aren't enough "good" ones.
Right. It's a two-pronged problem. :)
You're just the guy to do it Checkers. Maybe Met would give you a Life Time membership?
Oooooh! Now THAT would be a job I could be proud to do! :)
Persis Khambatta, who played a bald alien in "Star Trek: The Motion Picture" (1979), carried off the bald look because she was an amazingly beautiful woman.
Sinéad O'Connor, when she was much younger, had very short hair in her video for "Nothing Compares To you".
So it might be interesting (for variety) if some of the MetArt models had very short hair.
As for MetArt tags, I've never used them. I use the cover photo to help me decide to open a gallery, and then glance through the individual photos.
I'm not organized or compartmentalized enough to use tags to find the sets that I will enjoy.
But maybe tags are helpful to some members.
To be honest, I'm not even sure where the tags are hidden, or how to view them.
If used properly, with objective terms, tags can be very helpful. If you wanted to search by, say, setting ("bedroom"), or outfit ("jeans"), or hair color ("blonde"), then sure, that's a great idea. But tags like "inviting asshole," "more more more," "omg," or "makes me hard" (actual tags on yesterday's Charlene set) are completely and utterly useless. Not to mention that more than once we have seen tags used to insult the model.
Dump 'em. They won't be missed.
You said it bro. I long ago quit looking at tags and wish K would just get rid of them since you can't teach fools, stupid is incureable.
To borrow De Beers iconic advertising line, stupid is forever.
At first I thought you were referring to clothing tags. (; I agree, a lot of the tags are pure drivel and need to be censored.
The reason I don't advocate for removing tags altogether however is that there are purely descriptive tags that are useful when searching for a particular thing, such as hair color or lingerie or high heels for example.
I also hate tags on clothing! I cut all mine out. Sometimes I have a blonde moment and can't remember what size I take because none of my clothes have labels :-) Just sayin' :-)
I believe that you wrote similar before. Is it the itchy scratchy feeling, or . . .
As you continue the quest for your best abs and biceps et al, you may have to re visit the sweet biker for a painful but permanent reminder of the goal when you get there.
Maybe a bit of both, @Baggy! Actually I just had a new tattoo a couple of weeks ago, on my left hip, and it hurt more than I expected... :-)
I am a big coward about some things if they are going to hurt. The only time I would have stood the pain was when I told my children that I would have had FUCK YOU! done on my knuckles if their tats were visible in normal everyday work attire.
Luckily their tats are not visible in everyday attire and I never had to bear the pain and explain to friends and strangers what was up with my anti social tats.
Ha, that's funny! You got lucky there...! I don't know if it's true, but they do say women have a higher tolerance for pain than men. Something to do with the estrogen! I have four tattoos – two (my shoulder and bicep) were painless, the recent one on my hip hurt a fair bit, and the one on my lower back was agony! But none visible in work attire :-)
My only tat (so far) I got about two inches above my left nipple, Rose, and let me tell you it was quite exquisite pain! (: Funny thing though about halfway through I realized that I now understand why people get addicted to getting tats. (: Sadly however, I haven't had the money free since then to get the ones I wanted to follow it up with... now I'm going to have to get this one sharpened up before I can get any more!
Oh my goodness, that must have hurt a lot! Certain areas are worse than others... I'd like one on the inside of my arm but I've heard that's one of the worst places. Certainly is addictive though... :-)
Ha ha! You just made my day, Rose! :D
Don't dress in the closet(like a proper English girl) and you could look in a mirror and see
I agree with both of you, in the sense that tags can and should be useful, but here on MET they are not. User-defined tags, while well-intentioned, give too much opportunity to go off topic, and we've seen some pretty disgusting examples over the years. Tags should be tags, and comments should be comments.
I hid them a long time ago. Don't plan on bringing them back, unless they get narrowed.
can't cure stupid, so I don't look at Met tags
Bretona has fulsome, wholesome and utterly beautiful and voluptuous derriere . Wet dreams were made for such a stunning and delicious behind .
What a wonderful set.
Bretona is such a beautiful, fresh faced 'girly' girl with an exquisite body and creamy smooth skin.
Love the panty shots, from the waistband over the jeans to those awesome rear views as she disrobes. Nice tight panties too..
Simply gorgeous & a 10/10 from me - more Bretona soon please
Beautiful Bretona... She is breathtaking... see her beauty at #55, 56... many thanks to both for excellent pictures.
I love this tall, elegant girl, her lovely face and her athletic body. For me, the best sets of Bretona are in diffuse natural light, such as this one. 10/10.
Great mind thunk alike AGAIN. you must have short skirts and long, blonde hair and great education like Rose. Sorry, but it's a REALLY bad day today,gotta play. But I do Totally agree and gave both a 10
Elegant beauty with a fresh, natural, Spring like feeling. Lovely panty play too :-)
Hi Rose great minds think alike again. Must be all the education and killer negotiating skills(yes,I do read your blog sometimes)I did quite like both model and artist, and gave both a 10
Nice to know you are paying attention, Seadog :-) :-) :-)
Whoomp! There it is! Bretona is da BOMB. Pure distilled feminine sexuality. The white cotton thong under the blue jeans was the perfect touch, it added just the right spark of enticement and anticipation...
Cool, classic lovely model.
Thoroughly enjoyed each photo as she slowly removes her outfit.
Great face, lovely, slender body.
Wonderful skin tones.
Albert Varin does a Catherine-style gallery, but with a model who has an elegant, expressive face.
10 for the model, 10 for the photographer.
18 U.S.C. 2257 Record-Keeping Requirements Compliance Statement. All materials © 2017 metartnetwork.com. All models photographed were at least 18 years old.