This, on the other hand, is just plain vulgar smut:
And granted, it's a well-taken picture, but it belongs in the realm of porn that dirty old men bring into toilet stalls to wank to.
I feel sorry for that young model in the latter photo: whatever the photographer said to convince her to pose thus, honey, that picture does little to elevate your portfolio but relegates you to the level of cheap sluts for hire, sorry.
Increasingly, it appears as though there are a number of amateur photographers who are little more than lusty men in sheep's clothing who call up young female models for "artistic nude photography" sessions, and more often than not, they end up taking photos that really have little artistic expression value, and the photos turn out to be nothing more than additions to the said dirty old men's toilet-stall masturbation tools.
There's this girl I know who said she left halfway through a photography session when she was asked to insert weird objects into her pussy; she already had her doubts when the "photographer" wanted to do close-ups of her spreading her legs, and the final straw was when he unzipped his pants and asked if she would be ok if he let his dick hang loose while he shot away.
Seems to me like he's just using a prolonged photography shoot to time his little antics, with the eventual aim of fucking her out of convenience. Unfortunately, I don't think he's an Austin Powers, and even then, it's a totally passé trick to try to get women in bed. In fact, I don't even think it works.
But whatever rocks for these amateurs (both the photographers and models); I'm just thinking the girls should be a little more educated before they take on such assignments, and learn to differentiate between a bona fide pro and a sleazy amateur just out for easy sex.