Wetlook World Forum

Message # 50462.5.1.2.1.1.1.1

Subject: Re:the third...

Date: Wed 01/06/11 11:00:04 GMT

Name: MK

Email: wamtec@comcast.net

Website:

By NCgreg - Wed 01/06/11 04:55:55 GMT

Website:

I think I saw the third one when I visited Las Vegas.  This was in June, 2006... I am 99% sure it was her, but since talking to her would have caused a moment of high drama (due to my now X-gf), I only took note of her walking by...

By MK - wamtec@comcast.net Tue 31/05/11 09:29:01 GMT

Website:

By JeffS - Tue 31/05/11 03:13:23 GMT

Website:

By AnthonyX - anthonyx@jowc.net Mon 30/05/11 07:51:14 GMT

Website:

By JeffS - Mon 30/05/11 01:58:45 GMT

Website:

I too remember the early days of Al's WWW.  I remember all the early sites.  I'm sorry that I can't remember most of them.  There was a gal who sadly died who had a wonderful site.  I ever traded emails with her for a short time.

The scripted stuff is a non starter for me.  Wet tees, models in the shower or the pool.  It has to be unexpected falls or dunks.

I remember a youtube or two of wedding parties where most of the guests ended up in the water.  Priceless stuff.

I apreciate the thousands of tubes posted here.  But I'm really over Italian girls being carried into a pool screaming.  Give me a real woman who falls or is pushed and gets out with a smile and a lovely wet dress.

But I'll keep comming here.  Every now and then there's a gem.

By maxval - maxval1967@gmail.com Sun 29/05/11 22:41:02 GMT

Website: http://wet-look.co.nr

The more naked is the woman, the less wetlook effect is it. So I like normal clothing that covers the body. But the other extreme is neither good, I dont find anything sexual/erotic in coats and other kind of winter type clothings.

Also, I agree that wet t-shirt contest are NOT real wetlook, because the purpose of these contests is to show the naked body. I call this kind of stuff "mainstream erotic photo with water", but not wetlook. For me wetlook is focused only on wet clothing over the womans body without showing her naked.

I disagree with you on business clothing. I think in most cases business clothings are not enough sexy.

About myself: most of "wetlook people" know me as the photographer of my wife. I discovered wetlook at 14 years old age, but I was sure it was only a disease of mine. I realized only at 30 years old age that there were other people liking women in wet clothes.

For me it is not of any importance if a woman likes wetlook or not. I think most women dont like it. I have about 50-60 wetlook photo sessions of my wife with 4-5 thousands photos, and my wife said there was only 1 photosession when she felt any sexual "turn-on" effect. In all other cases it was only simply "interesting" for her, as she likes being a model.

By AnthonyX - anthonyx@jowc.net Sun 29/05/11 12:21:29 GMT

Website:

I've been following wetlook on the internet since about 1995, which now adds up to more than a decade and a half, and I've had a personal "interest" for as long as I can remember. Over all that time, my tastes and specific interests have evolved, and I've seen a wide variety of wetlook. From casual to formally attired, totally un-sexy outfits to all-out sexually provocative, from barely dressed to multiple layers with barely an inch of skin visible, from scripted film scenes to glamour to spontaneous dunkings to accidents, and from thoroughly enjoyed by the subject to thoroughly disliked, and scenes/situations which are somewhat unique to scenes/situations which tend to occur frequently. In all that I've seen, I've come to find that there are certain elements which make up an enjoyable and/or erotic wetlook scenario, and some which just don't register for me.

I've occasionally encountered some jeans-and-t-shirt scenes/pictures which make nice wetlook, but that's almost always because the subject is wearing a thin, tight t-shirt without a bra and you can clearly see her nipples and the contours of her breasts. I'm pretty sure the appeal has to do with the woman effectively exposing herself (as if the shirt isn't there), but she is technically clothed, and that the wet shirt is sublty enhancing her figure. Since casual clothes seem to be a frequent option for impromptu swimwear, it often leads me to find more appeal in outfits which are more formal. Business wear for me comes out as a favourite because of the incongruity when the wearer gets wet. All-out formal (like evening gowns) don't really do so much for me because a lot of formal wear is about exposing skin - bare arms, shoulders, short skirts, etc. generally mean there's less clothing involved, and it just ain't wetlook if there aren't clothes getting wet.

This leads me to the matter of "coverage". Summer casual is frequently shorts and tank top, which to me is about the same as a swimsuit... not all that interesting as wetlook. Conversely, heavy winter coats, with hats, mittens, and boots, seem to take things too far the other way. It's nice to see a woman's shape, and all bundled up for blizzard hides pretty much everything. Those latex body suits, although form-fitting, and somehow interesting on some level, also seem to go a little too far for my liking. That leaves blouses, skirts and dresses, which are generally on the modest side, but dressy... hence my focus on business attire.

For me, sexy-when-dry outfits don't always make for good wetlook. Sometimes, they don't look any different when wet. Sometimes there just isn't enough there. Perhaps also, it's a matter of how much the wetlook adds to a turn-on. A sexy outfit is already a turn-on; getting it wet for the sake of "turn-on" factor is somewhat redundant. On the other hand, a non-sexy outfit owes everything to the wetlook factor when it gets wet.

The situation is also an important factor. Scripted scenes can be quite interesting from a wetlook point of view, but can also be non-starters. If the subject is in jeopardy, it seems to take away from the appeal of a scene for it's wetlook content; likewise, if the subject dislikes the situation, it's difficult not to empathize with the character. The same goes for accidents and impromptu dunkings... if the subject ends up enjoying their situation, despite it being unintended, it can be enjoyable to watch, but otherwise, it's difficult to enjoy a scene where the subject (character, actress, or self) just wants to be somewhere else. That's why I often enjoy glamour scenes; the subject is most likely enjoying the scene (at least not disliking it), although they can get predictable. Also, the more unique a scene is, the more interesting it can be.

All this leads me to a (perhaps inconsistent) personal "profile" of those scenes I currently enjoy versus those I don't. Those scenes of impromptu pool jumps at weddings are nice to watch, although it depends a lot on what the wedding party is wearing: more bare skin = less interesting wetlook. Those ads (TV and internet) built around the catchphrase "girls look hot wet, guys don't" hit most of the marks as I've discussed. Wet t-shirt contests are for me almost always non-starters... planned soaking of casually attired subjects, and there are a LOT of them. There are some classic movie moments which may be funny, may "count" as wetlook, but do nothing for me (e.g. Lucy and Ethel in a shower), and some moments from not-so-classic movies like John Derek's version of Tarzan, or a certain episode of "Tremors" which for me contain good helpings of great wetlook.

As I said, this is all just a personal view.