Commentarium (7 Comments)

Apr 17 03 - 8:24pm
NZ

I think these photos are beautiful and have a certain raw and straight-forward quaility about them. Reading the other comments, I think that most people just aren't used to seeing nudes of males - after all of the nudes of females that I have seen-many without faces!!-I think that these photos are refreshing and vibrant. My comments are coming from a hetero female's perspective. Anyway, how is a man supposed to look while he is displaying his goods??? It seems that if it were women in similar "compromising" positions, it wouldn't be such an issue. Three cheers to the full male frontal!!!! -nitazel

Mar 26 03 - 3:11pm
P.G

I am a white single male and I have also posed nude in front of my camera. Initially I have a limp penis, but then in the subsequent photos I fluff up my pubic hair and try to pose with a good visible erection. I try never to touch my penis when the flash comes up
The basic idea is to appear natural, not apprehensive, or scared, and most of all keep your hands away from your private parts. Some of these guys do not look natural but look like they are from mug shots, except they are completely nude.

Mar 05 03 - 9:30pm
jj

Just looking at the feedback, I wanted to say that I am a straight woman and I think these photos are amazing and the models are very sexy...but maybe I'm into that dead-eyes look. Were they intended for a straight woman's gaze? Maybe, maybe not. Is it art? I think it is -- especially since these nudes are doing something I haven't seen done before, using subjects that I haven't seen overused in both art and media.

Mar 03 03 - 11:19pm
JC

I have to say that although this may indeed be art in the strictest definition, it is not meant to be erotic to a straight woman; that's for sure. I found these men to be dead-looking in their expressions, and the way they were holding their penises had nothing to interest me. Themodels and their bodies didn't look alive or real. I've seen this photographer's work here before, and I guess I am not his audience.

Mar 03 03 - 4:46pm
dw

you know, it is absolutely incredible how, with enough blathering bullshit, one can almost convince us that crude, insipid and uninteresting porn is somehow "art". does ms conesa really believe that because these guys are holding their dicks and looking at the camera, because they are minorities and they look like the hustlers and streetwalkers they undoubtedly are, that it MUST be art? is it because the photographer shot for recognizable "fashion names" that when he turns his camera to "real' boys, (with large dicks) it is, ipso facto art. i am also a photographer and i know how easy it is to shoot titilating, explotitive shots of boy and girls and how they are by their very nature attention grabbing, even provocative. but, to rhapsodize about this crap as if it were in any way artistically valuable is just plain stupid!

Feb 28 03 - 9:17pm
EE

Great to see these Latin lovelies in all their engorged glory. I'm a big fan of Matthias Vriens and when I saw you were featuring his work today, I finally ponied up the money to become a Premium member. Now, please show more work like this, and definitely please show more from Vriens. Thanks!

Feb 28 03 - 8:12pm
A.M

I do not know what to think. The pictures are very artistics, some of the guys should have left their penis alone. Just pose with a limp or with or an erection.