Here's my opinion on the pics.
Low angle is nice (especially on the legs). The blue (and sometimes white) sky background is not so nice. It "washes out" the images a little. And is not so easy on the eye (when viewing on a monitor). A white background means our monitors display a bright image which can tire the eye. Blue is better than white but still, pointing the lens at the sky allows so much sky light into the lens. I see you are compensating with a strong flash.
If you stood further away from the model, with a longer lens, then maybe there would be less sky. A nice varied, colorful, darker background would be easier on my eyes, even if it is simply a concrete background. Your images seem more like art or nature shots than erotic. If I were the photographer, I would use that beautiful natural light (reflect it onto the model) but try to frame the shots so that the model fills up almost all of the frame (frame out nature).
The model is big boobs and her legs look like nothing special. I would do almost no full body shots with her, unless you have a good reason to shoot full body.
The final (inside the pool) shots are more to my liking (less sky).
Are you difusing the flash? Try taping a piece of toilet paper over the flash bulb. It helped my photos a lot (tip I read on gfy) ... diffuses the flash light a little. For my outdoor shoots, I put tape over the flash and set flash strength to minimum. It helped a lot. The default flash exposure is often too strong outside (on all of my Canons). The reason you need such a strong flash is because of that bright sky background (another reason to reduce the sky).
You can see here that flash compensation makes a huge difference.
http://support.nikontech.com/app/ans...rking-distance
Maybe you knew this already.