Hey wetlookers!

I love your work. You guys and girls have taken my rather niche 'thing' and given me access to a world where I can enjoy what turns me on most - when girls get wet with all their clothes on!

However, I've been seeing a few sites and posts recently where the models have bikinis on under their clothes (and sometimes, wet bikinis where they're moving from one shoot outfit to another).

Maybe I'm just being picky, but to me, it isn't 'Wetlook' if you've a bikini or swimsuit under the clothes? Do you agree?

My wetlook fantasies revolve around women being thrown, pushed or pulled into the water when they least expect (or want it) - pool parties, hot tubs etc. That spontaneous, unplanned soaking that they aren't expecting or dressed for.

I love nothing more than the thought of a woman soaking right through to her bra and knickers - how the material looks and feels on the body and under the fingertips... for this reason I've been finding it hard to enjoy some of the planned shoots - especially the models that blatantly have prepared with swim suits?

Am I being a wetlook snob about this?!

Would love your thoughts.

(Pics for attention from an event near me called the lowland games - girls often on the spur of the moment (or completely involuntarily) end up having a go at the assault course etc - with outstanding results (no bikinis in sight!!!)

You're not being a snob, everyone has their personal tastes. I agree that I prefer when it's not in a swimsuit because that's what you're supposed to wear. However, I also love seeing women in some nice tight soaked speedo like suits (especially if they go see through).

Cool pics, dude! Do you have more? And of course you're not a wetlook snob. Spontaneous, unplanned soaking without or with see-through underwear is the best!

My thought is that wetlook should be when you get while wearing clothes you wouldn't normally swim in, like jeans and T-shirt's.

I have to agree with this. Swimsuits (and wetsuits et al) just dont logically fit into wetlook for me. They're made to get wet thus they lack the inherent nature of wetlook.

Exactly! I've always been a big fan of 'unplanned' wetlook, especially on women and to that end I always prefer full clothing. And I'm a big fan of dunk tanks and I always say, "Anything less than fully dressed is cheating!" (for anybody who sits in one)

I tend to apply a more scientific litmus test for how I define wetlook. For me, wetlook only happens when a fabric reacts with water in specfic ways and does one of these three things

- changes shape and clings
- goes see thru
- changes color or become shiny

Any fabric that does at least one of these three things qualifies as a wetlook scene for me. So for example some bathing suit scenes can qualify when they go see thru -- e.g. the classic 70's Speedo suits worn by celebs on "Battle of the Network Stars".

Conversely there are some fabrics today that are totally impervious to water (e.g. Neoprene, Rexine, Latex) that have no reaction to water and look no different in and out of water. Many modern fabrics are purposely designed with fabrics for modesty (e.g. swim vests, burkinis) and those fail all 3 of my litmus tests.

BTW, I hate to burst your bubble, but bikini's worn under clothing is just the tip of the iceberg, because on almost every Hollywood movie or tv series where the actress is in cold water and wearing jeans, the girl is wearing jeans so you cannot see the wetsuit she is wearing underneath.

Of course everyone has their own opinion, but for me there is a bigger question that I would like to see a poll on on ....i.e. do you prefer "real wetlook" or "forced wetlook". Real wetlook being defined at wetlook that occurs naturally where the girl is not coerced by a wetlook fan, as opposed to wetlook that is forced because the girl is being directed to do so.

MK

Everyone has their own tastes and you're not being a snob, but I'm afraid I completely disagree.

To me, one of the sexiest things someone can do is deliberately chose to wear a swimsuit of bikini under their normal clothes, as a statement of intent, "I know I'm going to get wet and Im really looking forward to it, bring the water!"

Note though to me this only applies if they are wearing ordinary clothes over the swimsuit, so it's being used as underwear. Getting wet in just a swimsuit isn't really wetlook it's just getting wet in a swimsuit. The times when swimsuits on their own fit into WAM is when someone gets messy in one.

A look I've always liked is when a girl wears a one-piece swimsuit as a top, with say jeans and a jacket, or a nice pair of high waist denim shorts or disco pants over it, the look can also work with business suits if the swimsuit is plain and logo-free. The swimsuit acts as a very tight fitting and quite sexy top, with the rest of the clothes providing the wetlook context.

Here's an example of a set we did on this theme, with Chastity wearing a black swimsuit, high waist baggy jeans, wellies, and a denim jacket. She goes completely into the water and ends up totally soaked, to me this is definitely wetlook, though I accept the outfit won't appeal to everyone.
https://saturationhall.umd.net/download_info/blue-jeans-in-the-river

Of course if the model is fully dressed all through the scene (and there isn't a strip-to-underwear section at the end) then chances are you'll never know what they have on under their clothes, if anything - wetlook in satin dresses or skin tight outfits can be horrendous for showing up VPL, so some models may decide to just dispense with underwear altogether to ensure a smoother, sexier look once they are soaked. And as MK says, often in Hollywood movies, the actors will all have wetsuits on under their clothes for water scenes, though it will be carefully filmed and edited so the wetsuits don't show on screen.

Having said all that, even when wearing swimwear under clothes I'd expect a model to change into a fresh completely dry one before doing a second shoot, putting dry clothes on over wet swimwear, unless there is a good reason for it, isn't really on. We did it once, when the model was enjoying herself so much she decided to do an extra unplanned soaking and we'd run out of swimsuits so she just kept her wet one on, and given the breadth and depth of variety in the WAM scene I could imagine it might actually be requested in a custom, but in any studio setting changing the whole outfit between scenes should be standard.

Attached are a few pics from that set I linked above - TBH, if I hadn't said that her top is a swimsuit, would many people have realised? We state it in the description anyway though, as we believe in being completely transparent with customers, would hate someone to buy something and then regret it afterwards.

I agree totally! One of the loveliest things you can see is a young lady sitting by the pool with her t-shirt and shorts over her swimsuit. And you wonder if she's getting in like that. You just hope that she does. This is definitely wetlook to me, it's fun, it's just a little daring and it's different. And it's decent too, so you can do it in public, which to me is half of the thrill.

I did a poll too, 14/01/2017, on a similar question, "Are Swimsuits Wetlook" and a majority of respondents then agreed that they are or could be.

Great Post, thanks.

And if you think an attractive girl in a skimpy bikini getting wet is not sexy...... (try "Sky in dunk tank" thread)
But i fully get the idea that a girl in a tight fitting dress in the same situation is equally sexy.
It all comes down to what rocks your boat.

I have my own litmus test. I do recognize and understand the qualities of wet fabrics, but that would also apply to a towel or a dish rag.

For me, theres something more to it then just fabric. I prefer the inappropriateness of items which are not intended to get wet or be worn wet. A bikini is intended and designed to get wet, and thats totally fine if you're into bikini clad women, but a business outfit is not intended or designed to get wet and thats the attraction for me. So, seeing a female wearing a wet business outfit would qualify as wetlook whereas a woman wearing a bikini in water does not, because that would be appropriate. Make sense?

Don't get me wrong, I have a pulse and I do like seeing a sexy wet woman in a tiny bikini, like any other male, of this species. But to me, this doesn't qualify as wetlook. For it to qualify as wetlook, the clothes has to look like it was never intended to get wet. The more inappropriate it is for water, the better I like it. No woman would normally go for a swim in a dress. Thats the allure for me.

I do love the clinginess, shininess, and sheerness of wet fabrics. Interestingly you won't find those qualities in an off-the-rack, made for the masses bikini. Instead the materials used are thick so they don't show off those sexy female bits very well. The only thing a bikini is really good at in terms of their design is they are cut to show off the female figure in the most attractive way possible.

Besides the clinginess, shininess, and sheerness of wet fabrics, I like other qualities that only wetlook can provide. A wet business outfit can hold a lot of water and I happen to find it attractive when a woman climbs out of the water, with a deluge pouring out of her clothes. I like the sounds too. The swishing of wet clothes against her body, the squelching of wet shoes, the sound of dripping water. I like that disheveled appearance.

In the water, I like how clothes will move. I love how a long skirt will flow or wrap around a woman's legs, or how a business jacket will float. Theres also that sexy element of revealing that which the clothes were supposed to conceal. A skirt worn underwater will float up to reveal panties (or more), a blouse can float up too, to reveal a bra (or more) -you get the hint.

Shoes are also a big part of wetlook for me. Not only do they complete the look of an outfit, they can change the entire look of any outfit. There is no other item of clothes that screams "inappropriate" than wearing a pair of shoes in the water. Flip-flops, shower shoes, or any shoe intended for water doesn't cut it for me. It has to be something not intended for water. The inappropriate use of high heels while swimming can extend to how ineffective and inefficient they are to swim in, to include losing them while swimming or coming off and hanging on the ankles by a strap.

There can be something whimsical and eccentric about a fully clothed bath, especially when the female taking the bath, lathers up and rinses off, as if she was taking the bath in the more traditional nude manner.

Now having said this, I have done a few (very, very few) sets where a model we were photographing was wearing a bikini or bathing suit under her clothes. And we had good reasons. Some models aren't comfortable with revealing themselves (Exibit "A" that bikinis aren't sheer or revealing) So we will compromise and allow it, but we photographed these sets to have the appearance that they were not wearing a bikini under their clothes. There are at least two sets, I can recall where we did reveal that a bikini top was being used as part of an outfit. In those particular situations we tried to downplay the bikini top and concentrate on the other elements of the set.

So in a nutshell, to me a bikini being worn in water by a beautiful woman, while sexy in it's own rite to me isn't wetlook. Sure it's wet and it looks wet, but wetlook to me is the wearing of clothes not intended to get wet or be wet, to include shoes and other items no one would normally wear in the water

EdR
asplashofglamour.com

for me the attraction is for the outer clothes soaked, this also comes from knowing what they feel like soaked compared to just underwear wet.
so to me it doesn't matter what is underneath if i only see the outer wet

as for 'you're not supposed to wear swimsuit under clothes for regular wear'
i have chosen to wear a one piece swim suit in favour of a bra and knickers quite a few time simply for comfort or the fact you can have a very low backed dress without reveling bra straps when you have a low cut swim suit under a dress, also you can wear just a swim suit and skirt and it just looks like a top and skirt.

another reason why i say swim suit with clothing can be wet look is the feeling, it can feel more like wetlook that a regular top and skirt when soaked, the matierials in swimsuits still behave and feel like or better than regular clothes.

that being said i do get why people don't like seeing them in situations where they could be avoided, but there might be a models choice to stay covered with a swim suit for modesty (better than lack of models doing wetlook)

It's all down to personal taste tbh .each to there own .I like a wetlook shoot with all clothes being worn downto undergarments aswell. I also like ( in a separate shoot wet lycra )so I guess if your getting clothes wet it should be all clothes .

As the previous contributer so eloquently put it, it's very much down to pernonal taste.

I for one adore one piece swimsuits and would love to see them in more wet and messy scenarios, both as the only clothing, and as "underclothes"

Now I know that I am at odds with the vast majority of wetlook officianardos who will claim that a swimsuit is NOT propper clothing and should not be considered for a wetlook shoot. And occasionally I might agree with them. It is very nice to see clothing go see through when wet, thus exposing some more "intimate bits" that would have remained unexposed when dry.

But I do like a good swimsuit.

I really enjoy the pictures put out by Dungeon Master for this very reason, though other than his work I cannot think of any other output where a woman has been shown in a wetlook production obviously wearing a one piece swim suit under her clothes.

I love the idea that a woman is going to get wet and enjoy doing so, either for sexual reasons, or just for fun (don't they add up to the same thing??!) and dresses accordingly. It works so much more for me when her chosen undergarment is a swimsuit!

It may not be your kink, but there are those of us out there who enjoy it. Please don't be too hard on us.

I would agree that to me a swimsuit or bikini on it's own isn't wetlook, and personally I dislike bikinis except as potential underwear, most of them are way too skimpy for my taste. However the UMD's definition of wetlook actually includes swimwear and complete nudity, in contrast to other forums where only clothed scenes count as proper wetlook. There's at least one producer who specialises in women getting wet in just swimsuits, and as they've been around for a while I assume they get decent sales volumes from it.


Good points, most of the time if someone wears a plain swimsuit as a top, most people won't know the difference, especially as you can get bodysuits that are very similar to swimsuits except they unclip underneath, which are intended to be worn as eveningwear tops, the advantage over a normal top being they won't pull out of a skirt or trousers if the wearer has to stretch or bend, as when getting out of a low-slung sports car at a classy venue.

Plus of course for those "in the know" having a swimsuit as underwear can be a way to signal "yes, you can throw me in the pool fully dressed later".


Thanks, glad you like our work! There are definitely messy swimsuit scenes in our release queue, on their own and worn under clothes, and I'm talking to a couple of models at the moment about a future messy scene where they'll wear swimsuits, waterproof trousers, and wellies, to get very messy in.

One more reason why models might wear a swimsuit under their clothes for an "in public" wet scene, after the scene is shot and they have to head back to the changing room to prepare for the next scene, a swimsuit is acceptable to wear in public when proper underwear usually isn't, so wearing one under their clothes means they can strip down to it as soon as they are out of the water, which can save significant wind chill, at least in more temperate climes. So there are practical as well as kink reasons to do it.

I don't know if "UMD' is defining wetlook or if they are being all inclusive since the UMD is basically a portal. The problem with defining wetlook is, there isn't an 'official' definition. It's left up to each of us to define it in our own way.

As far as my own definition of what wetlook is, I can only give an opinion -and a photo or three

EdR