This is a difficult question.  First, we disagree that walks in the rain should be canceled--some people, us included to a certain extent--think it's really hot to see the girl shivering.  As for pictures that don't come out perfectly, that's a hard decision.  On the one hand, if they don't look perfect, it might make the quality of the site seem to go down.  On the other hand, if we have naked pictures of Rachel and the only problem with them is they are a little dark, why not show them to you?!  For us personally, there's no such thing as a picture of Rachel naked that we would not want to see.
 
The exact same philosophy is true of the back-side pictures.  It's inevitable that we take more pictures of their butts than their fronts as we follow them around.  But the only way to fix the ratio would be to give you less pictures.  We've decided again, if we have a picture of the model from behind, why not show it to you?!  If you were buying a magazine, it would be weird to see ten very similar pictures in a pictorial.  But this is not a magazine.
 
We just had a good idea, however.  We might be able to rearrange the pictures.  Have the "set" of pictures that are 40 or so of the very best pics, then another page with the "leftovers."  We'll consider it.  But the question is, and we don't think the answer is obvious, does it improve the quality of the site to show _less_ pictures?
 
As for interviews, we addressed this previously, good suggestion, we're working on it.

Wow, I really liked the rain pics, and I think they turned out great.