[untitled]

I'm not a huge fan of the angle she has her face at - it makes me want to turn mine so that I can see her better. However, the band of skin high on the thigh is awesome. It immediately changes a relatively innocent pose to something fairly racy. Less is definitely more here. Nice job.

For me this is the best of the three with the closer crop. I am not really sure what your intentions are - portrait, saucy/ glamour figure study? But I like this and would have considered asking her to drop the left arm slightly for an almost straight line between the elbows which, I think, would further keep the attention on the face for longer before the eye wandered elsewhere, perhaps just a matter of personal preference. This is a neg scan and if you intend to print it then it may be worthwhile to experiment with richer tones in the dark areas, just a thought. A good exercise and I would like to see more. Thanks for posting.
Regards
John

Too timid on the part of the model and photographer....
.... nothing of interest to me.

I put great value on your comments, even catastrophic ones like vpwphoto's one here above. This is why I took quite some time to think about it, let it settle down and rethink about it.
I can't help but recognising a bit of a communication/coherence issue here (as in most art fields). What does "Too timid" means? Did I put "Hardcore Sex" as a title for this image? Too timid compared to what? Let's consider that the same commenter stated in another page that the other image "has too much of the feeling of playful exploration or attempted shock value".
So in the same roll I'm swaying between "too timid" and "attempted shock"? If we were talking about a third person, I would say that this is highly unlikely. In fact in my intentions, neither the first was "attempting shock", nor I was trying to catch consensus with this one with some sexual call in this image. I also believe that most modern art is too pretentious about its subject, and this small APUG commentary has something to do with the great picture. I think that art is the HOW one thing is done, not the WHAT. That is, it's the way a girl is portrayed that should convey feelings, not the number of naked parts involved. Until maybe 150 years ago, a painter was basically NOT able to choose his/her subjects, but those days can count great pieces of art, and we can discern many of the inclinations and intentions of the authors based on the choice of palette, the composition, the use of space... So would we label a Madonna con Bambino by Raffaello "too timid"? If it's too timid, then it's not worth of interest?
Don't think I'm trying to say that me and Raffaello Sanzio should be equal in intrinsic values. I'm just wondering about what has been lost in the years, when looking at/making/trying to make art.

What are your thoughts about this, folks?