Yeah, I was thinking the same thing! I'm only here for the photos, and it's so annoying when there's several days with only videos. I really don't get why there's a lot more videos than photosets since most videos are just fly-on-the-wall filming of the photosets!

Why can't we ever get some peeing scenes without the use of hands? It's not natural and spoils the view.

Like all your outdoor sets, it's shot in direct sunlight with ugly dark shadows. I'm sure she's pretty but we won't see that until she's lit properly. Oh and as usual, most shots are either extreme closeup or she's miles away from us. Jeez.

Another recycled set. And with so few photosets each week I feel cheated.

I do so hate these sets shot in direct sunlight... especially when models are wearing sunglasses.

Videos for 3 days in a row now. Photosets here are getting even fewer each week. :-(

There are already so few photo sets here each week, and today we get a low-res repost from the past. Not impressed!

Ruined by the sunglasses. What's the point when you can't see who the girl is? We keep telling ALS but they ignore us.

Another set with awful image quality -- I'm assuming this is another repost from many years ago. You'd think ALS would have enough material to post new sets since they only post a stills set about 3 times per week.

We can't see her eyes and she's much too far away. (I don't know why I bother, as nothing ever changes here.)

As usual, I had to zoom in so far just to see what's going on. The shooters are more interested in the scenery than the girl.

Yet another low-quality recycled set. You'd think that with only 3 photosets a week this site could manage to post only new sets. But no.

Yep, more damn sunglasses. This site never listens and never changes.

I agree. The eyes are so important. And these sets in direct sunlight are just horrible. It's lazy photography... and this site has been doing it for years.

Yes, poorly photographed indeed! These direct sunlight sets are as bad now as they've been over many, many years on this site. And the framing sucks too -- almost all landscape and too distant from the model in about half the shots.

She's far, far too distant to see much, with the girl occupying so little of each shot. I guess you guys are more interested in the room than the model!

Thanks for all the panoramic pictures of the room. As usual, the girl only occupies a small part of most shots.

As usual, all the pee action takes place miles away from the camera. Why oh why does this photographer waste so much of the frame?

Did the ALS photographer previously shoot for Home & Garden, or some similar magazine? Most of the shots are landscape and are of the whole damn room! The model is a tiny part of most shots. This never improves.

As usual, the model is much too far away in almost every shot. Why, oh why do you waste all of your picture resolution on the background?

I so agree -- every set is like this: much too far away from the model. And yeah, I hate the sunglasses too, the eyes are so important. You just don't photograph models in direct sunlight; it's unprofessional.

As usual, most pictures are wasted because the model is much too far away. Why do you waste all your frame space with grass?

Dammit -- why are the models always so far away? They're either extreme closeups (where you can't see who it is) or else they're a tiny piece of the frame. Fill the frame with the girl! We don't care about the room or the garden!

Like the other sets on this site, most shots are either extreme closeups, or else the model is miles away from the camera. Why do you waste so much of your image area with background? We don't care about the sofa.

If you guys are going to continue posting these casting sets, then why don't you shoot the images so that the model fills the frame and we can see her properly, instead of being on the other side of the room. We're not here to enjoy the curtains or the furniture.