hair and lips and smoke and art (full session)

Julia for sure is one of the most beautiful models I ever had. Apart of  her wonderful body with abundant blonde hair everywhere, I believe that  in her lovely face one can see that she's an artist herself, a strong  female personality with a catching and irresistible sensuality.

The  series I present you today is he complete session, each and every photo  I took of this topic. So in some you see that the shadows aren't as  they should be, in some the eyes are half closed or the the face is in a  not so benefiting angle (although I think, she's very pretty in all of  the shots).

I upload the complete series (and although some are  quite hot I put them in the "power" - and not the "special" category)  because I want to talk a bit about my artistic approach, my doubts, and  my permanent struggle in the questions about the artistic representation  of sensual femininity, sensuality and sexuality. As you see the set in  its original sequence you can see how I try to achieve my goal, how I  slightly change the light, change my position, change the pose of the  model. You can also see - it is obvious - that the model was very  aroused during that session...

Probably as every artist, from  time to time (of often...) I ask myself what I am doing. So it's not the  first time I talk about that here on Patreon.

The topic of my  artistic effort is obvious: the sensuality and eroticism of beautiful  women. The question is: what makes the difference between a piece of art  and a simple click showing a naked girl? In other words: do I produce  artistic work or do I just satisfy the horny desires of men (and  myself)?

In some of the posts I upload from time to time,  especially the videos, there is no question, because it's clear: they  are the product of my lust and sexual desire, and, apart of that also in  those moments I try to make a beautiful image, there is not much  artistic intent in those contents. They are just fun and pleasure, hot  fun and pleasure, and a psychologist (or everybody) might even find some  "elderly man exhibitionism" in it - and for sure isn't very wrong with that.

But I am not talking about those clearly and purely sexual  posts. I am talking about images like the ones in today's series (and  some others that even contain sexual acts but that I still consider  artistic).

I believe that you can see in this series that I tried  to capture Julia's seductive sensuality, her erotic lust and joy, in  artistic images. Of course, when I saw how her nipples got hard and her pussy got  wet and the lips opened I took this in the foreground during some images  - how could I not! - but despite of showing her lustful openness I  still think those images have nothing pornographic. I believe those  photos do not reduce the model to a sexual object, but show her as a  sexual subject. Which for me makes a huge difference.

The  "problem" is that I don't see anything dirty or wrong in sexual  excitement, nor in visible private parts. In contrary: the more "the  world" rules back to medieval ideas of moral - only look at the extreme  perversion, probably pathological sexual deviation, of Mark Zuckerbeg  with his nipple-phobia - the more I want to portray the beauty and true  innocence of a happy and free sexuality; in my case from the heterosexual male  view on the adult and self-determined, free female. (I have tried to  take images of men, too, but haven't achieved the desired results. The  images were beautiful, I believe, but they looked kind of gay, but then again  not gay enough to transport gay feelings in a credible and lustful  manner. I believe erotic, hetero-sexual images of men should be  taken by women).

And in a way I want to be explicit in my  artistic expression. I have a deep dislike for anything hypocrite and I  think, if you want to concentrate on the topic of sensuality, eroticism  and sexuality it is wrong to exclude some natural parts of the body (and  especially those parts that play such an important role in erotic  pleasure).

But then it is said, that art must transcend the topic  it is dealing about. Generate a feeling and make reflect and think  about a topic without documenting it directly. That art may not arouse  sexual desire in the observer, because if it does it is porn.

But  then, when I believe that even an obviously excited pussy is beautiful  and worth to be portrayed in a beautiful image - how can I avoid to  arouse (and to get aroused)? And why should I want to avoid it? Is there something wrong in  getting aroused? Is it ok for art to provoke anger, disgust, happiness,  sadness, fear... feelings of any kind - but not sexual lust?

It  is considered art to document landscapes, architecture, faces, plants,  animals, sports, culture, religion... but documenting the human body as a  sensual, sexual subject is porn, trivial, primitive.

I don't  think so. For me pornography doesn't depend on what is shown, but how it  is shown and what intentions are behind it. I consider a lot of what I  see on Instagram or Facebook as porn, although the "crucial" parts are  tapped. But the expression is fake, like in a porn movie when the actors  pretend horniness but you see in every moment that they are just  waiting that the shoot ends and they can cash the fee. The girls are  nothing but decoration, like a piece of furniture you place somewhere  and use it.

In my images - I believe, and it's what I want - the  female models are real human beings. They are free and authentic. I  don't ask them to do things they don't want to do. I don't try to put  them in roles which they don't like. I try to make an atmosphere in  which they feel good, comfortable, safe - and where they can express  their own sensual feelings in there own female way - and I look at them  with my male artists eyes.

But sometimes I ask myself: am I the one who is completely wrong, or are it the dishonest moralities that are wrong?

So,  look at the many images of today's series (hopefully enjoy them!) and,  if you feel like, tell me what you think! I am 61 years young, young  enough to evolve and to learn. Critics are welcome.