I’m a huge fan of public nudity and was pleasantly surprised to see this site since it is actually a rare site in a rare niche. This site features well-known American porn stars doing some relatively risky public nudity.
The site has 18 scenes with some well known models doing public nudity in the Los Angeles area. Stars such as Taylor Rain, Gen Padova, Violet Blue, Courtney Simpson and Desire Moore make appearances. There is public nudity in some relatively secure-but-still-public areas and most scenes also include the model performing oral sex on one of the guys. The site no longer updates and the newest scenes are likely from 2005 to maybe 2007. This, unfortunately, is where the good news ends.
I find that public nudity sites can be hit or miss. I realize this is subjective but some sites manage to remove all the tease and risk from public nudity, thereby turning the heat way down too. Such is the case here, but the heat gets further turned down by the fact that the cameraman is clearly an amateur – the camera work is jerky to the point that if you have a weak stomach you might want to avoid these videos. To make matters worse, the models are often filmed while standing in the shadows so lighting becomes a serious flaw. To top it all off, the editing can be pretty bad too with too many potentially interesting bits obviously cut out.
But it gets worse… assuming the videos were shot several years ago and realizing that technology continues to advance, then even by the standards of the year these were shot they are well below the norm. The videos come in at just 320x240 at 330kb/s and only 8fps. Surely these specs were state of the art more than a decade ago. The low resolutions combined with the jerky camera work make a lot of the scenes essentially unwatchable.
And continuing on our cavalcade of crap, the scenes are only offered as clips with no option to download the entire scene as one complete video. The only potential good news is that by offering clips only you might not realize that the download speeds are up to a decades-old standard too. I haven’t seen download speeds this slow in years. The average speed I got was about 130kb/s. That’s KILOBYTES, not megabytes. I saw speeds drift down to double digits frequently.
I always try to find something positive about any site I join, but there’s really nothing good to say about this site. The one possible positive – big-name American porn models doing public nudity in Los Angeles – is vastly overshadowed by poor camera work, poor lighting, poor editing, abysmal download speeds and the lack of full-video availability.
The last possible positive also falls flat: this could have just been a bad site in an otherwise good network, but the rest of the network (Hush Pass) isn’t much better. So even if you’re a big fan of public nudity like I am, trust me on this: don’t bother joining this network.
Does anyone have connection issues with this site?
This is the only site where I have problems signing in, as well as navigate within the site once I'm in. If I want to be successful I have to hit the "reload page" button on my browser over and over until I finally connect. Just clicking once on the link won't do it because if I do it that way I could sit there for minutes waiting for a page to load and it never does. I thought it might be my browser but this is the only site where this happens. Any helpful suggestions would be appreciated.
I recently wrote in the forums of this site and my critique was removed in less than 24 hours. Please note that #6 was wrong and I did add a reply to note this. Basically, the video I thought was reposts was video that appeared on another site (jackass-nudebeach.com) so it was not reposted for this site. Here is what I wrote:
Subject: We are not that stupid
While I appreciate the site there are several problems that could be addressed to make the site much better. However, I am guessing that those who own/manage it are soooo rich that they do not care to make more money, or they smoke pot all day and are unmotivated to improve it. In either case here is what needs to be fixed, because for those of use who subscribe and browse the collection from time to time...to put it bluntly...we are not that stupid to notice that...
1. Making 20 videos out of a single 5 minuet clip and then spreading them over a 5 month period doesn't mean that the site has more content. It just means the user has to spend more time downloading a bunch of short clips instead of one. I assume the owners feel this increases the appearance of their content and/or dissuades users from using more bandwidth. In either case it sucks and makes the experience second rate to quality adult sites.
2. Video shot from above that shows shoulders and bald-headed men plain suck and should appear very rarely. If I wanted to look at the tops of naked bald headed men I would find a spot in the ceiling of the men's locker room at the local YMCA.
3. High Definition video is NOT up-converted standard definition video OR compressed HD video made to be smaller in file size so that users use less bandwidth. Just because a video appears in HD aspect ratios doesn't make it HD, and yes we can tell. Come on most of us HAVE HD or are members of sites that offer REAL HD (e.g. ilovethebeach.com). Real HD doesn't take up 9MB for 17 sec clips but about 50+MB.
4. Did I mention how STUPID clips that are less than 1 minuet are...
5. Taking captures of the REAL HD video (which is not made available to subscribers) and then posting it as "pictures" is weak. It is quite obvious that this is what you are doing...
6. You may have 190+ pages of video content (mostly due to the STUPID 17 second clips), but that doesn't mean you need to repost so many videos. Sure most people will get tired of wading through the STUPID 17 second clips, but those of us with memories longer than goldfish are quite aware of how many reposts appear in the course of a year.
To summarize this site could be SUPER cool. It could have the quality that ilovethebeach.com has with its content. But it appears that those who manage this site are cheap and prefer to cut corners and maintain their profit margin instead of increase it. It could be such a great site too which is what makes it a shame...I do wish they read this and consider some of what I have said (even if it was caustic and sarcastic).
reply quote
This is NOT just an alteration of my latest review of Ero Berlin - but more like a runner-up - and a suggestion for the site-owners/webmasters - after being a member for a month - and leaving now.....
First: you still got some damn fine videos - AND some with dirty talk.
BUT:
1) Your updates are really not worth the price: 5 (or maybe 6, the most) in a month....not ok.
2) Your site is maybe the slowest, I've come across in a long time (browsing) - downloads a little better.
And again: Too bad, because you've got some very fine potentials here, and I guess a lot of more serious pornusers will get fed up with the slow speed and the too few updates...
Look forward to improvements here, because this is in many other ways a great site
Having signed up for a trial I was astonished to see that I could only watch 3 movies. This proved way too optimistic. Every time I clicked something I got the message that I had one less movie to watch and should upgrade. After a few futile attempts I had no movies left and seen nothing.
Not only crooks but very stupid ones into the bargain, because there is no way I'll ever go near them again.
Maggie claims that:
"On Public Nude Sluts there are "No rules and no limits."
Well as stated in the site facts there's a daily dl limit of 1 GB. I am puzzled as to why this isn't considered being a con and not even mentioned in the review?
A site that is MUCH better than Public Nude Sluts is Nip-activity, which received a lower score than this site, even if there's NO dl limit on Nip-activity, and it has lots of longer running HD videos!
Why, if I may ask?
And one thing more:
The site facts states that use of downloadmanagers aren't allowed, yet Maggie says they should work...?
Why would you want to use a dl manager when all you can dl is 1 GB a day?
I bought the first PD episode prior to the site becoming active. I've had several memberships to Kink.com sites and have always been impressed with their quality. If you like porn with a harder edge (but without the Max Hardcore kind of abuse), Kink is for you.
One thing that made me uncomfortable about Public Disgrace is that being in public means interaction with people who may not want to see what is going on. Kink is a very responsible company, so I'm sure they take some precautions. It also appears that these scene are all shot in Europe (Eastern Europe). I presume that's because shooting this kind of material in the U.S. would have the morality police tossing them in jail for the rest of their lives.
Public Disgrace is now active and the site looks up to Kink standards again. I''ve just taken out a membership and will post a full review soon.
I just joined the dancingbear.com 2 day trial. The videos have no download option even though on their website it says "Watch or download this video" on every video update! Before it just stated "watch this video" but now since they updated this to "Watch or download this video" on all the videos, I decided to try it. In the members area no download option was available (8-26-10)you can still only stream the videos. I explained this to customer service in a email but in response they just cancelled my membership without commenting on the download video false advertising. I expected more from Bangbros, the owner of this site!
This always boggles my mind. I looked at the preview section of this and most of the girls are shaved.
These sites that claim 'real' women out there most always seem to have shaved women. I suspect that the average lady out there who is not in the sexual industry may be trimming, but I would suspect the vast minority are shaved. I think that one of the big reasons for the popularity of Abby Winters is that most of the girls are not shaved and look like the 'girl next door.'
When the site was launched this fall, there was a lot of concern being shown in the members forum about the legality or appropriateness of shooting in public. The outdoor scenes were deliberately shot in Eastern Europe, where laws are less strict than in the US, as well as the fact that penalties and fines are lower. Immediately members from Eastern Europe had a lot to say. What also generated a lot of criticism from members was that many scenes seemed to show no concern if children, or even adults were witnesses without their consent. The rules at present do not permit children to be witnesses, nor unwilling adults. Many scenes have cars passing by. How can anyone know if there are children in the cars? How can anyone know if the adult passengers consented? These are still unanswered questions in my opinion. While the site is very exciting, are they following their self imposed rules? Are they violating any laws? Who knows.
Outdoors sets, apparently shot in Eastern Europe interest me. Also those done in bars, public transportation and so on. Are they all acted with no real bypassers? I guess it'd be hard to find a bus driver that accepts that kind of action, a bar owner might be easier with even willing audience. Of course it's clear that all the touching and action is scripted, if for nothing else, at least to avoid STD's and such.
The newer stuff seems to be more indoors sadly. I wouldn't really call it public if it was shot in a private party or event.
Types of Public Disgrace shoots makes interesting content
Public disgrace is still a very interesting site where pretty girls get a public fucking, often with a dose of BDSM.
It now breaks down into two types of shoots. One is where the girl is led around naked in a public place for many minutes and eventually gets fucked in a more semi-public area like a park. In these shoots there seems to be a lot of emphasis on the public reaction to the naked girl and the eventual naked sex by passers-by (seems to be in Europe where the public nudity laws are not like the USA). To be honest, this is fast-forward time for me and I feel the flaunting of nudity and sex in front of pedestrians, some of whom who would rather not see it, is problematic and not particularly sexy.
On the other hand, many shoots are inside, in porn shops or other small establishments or in the San Fransisco Kink.com Armory with an enthusiastic invited crowd. These scenes seem to be a lot hotter in my opinion and I really enjoy the crowd reaction enjoying the hot fucking.
A definitely interesting site with a "twist" from your everyday porn.
As a past member of Dancing Bear, I read with interest Maggie's review (TBP) of this site on 1st February 2012.She mentions in the review,almost casually ,"and downloading as wmvs and mp4s in four different sizes".Through my experience,and as the above comments will attest, this site did not allow downloads in it's formative years.If,in fact Dancing Bear now permits downloads, I feel that as a porn review site TBP,should make it very clear that even though this site did not originally allow downloads,they now do allow them.While this may appear slightly trivial,as a porn user,and I am sure many will concur,I will not join a site that does not allow downloads.Also,as a frequent visitor to the TBP site and admirer of their reviews,I have been waiting for a review of Dancing Bear's "sister" site Horny Birds.The review was scheduled for 26th January 2012,but TBP have had trouble accessing the site.I will be very interested to see if they now allow downloads.I am not a great believer in what I read on website join-up pages,hence my need to read clear,informative and accurate reviews and user comments from TBP and Porn Users.
"NEW PHOTO VIEWER posted January 24, 2010
Our members requested a better way to view our photos and now we've delivered! When you click "VIEW PHOTO SET" on a model's video, you'll now access the new photo set viewer. You can surf to any photo set right from the viewer and also download the high resolution zip file!"
There are two photosets at Eroberlin currently that have images at 3872x2592 (both of Cayenne), available in zip format only as the message on the home page makes clear.
The rest of them go no larger than 1600 px -- when the photos are in landscape orientation. 1080 is normal for portrait.
This would be a pointless quibble on my part were it not for the fact that Eroberlin itself labels those two 3872x2592 photosets of Cayenne as "high resolution" and labels all of the other photosets available on the site as "low resolution." Mind you, this is not from the photo viewer, which doesn't label but provides download only through a simple disk icon. But from each model page, there are buttons for downloading zips, and when you click them, "low resolution" is the only option available -- except in those two Cayenne cases already mentioned.
But just to make sure, I downloaded several sets from the viewer anyway. It didn't make any difference.
Well, Eroberlin, if you don't call them "high resolution," I guess I won't either. But how do you explain the statement you made, quoted above? You're telling people that they can get something from your site that even you don't believe you have!
Could be a much better site - certainly its advertisement is good, but the site isn't as good as the ads. Too small a collection of videos to justify the price. Very little hardcore. Used to be better in the past.
formerly screenname below of rsmdev...this guy is an absolute joke!! i have emailed him numerous times...NO REPLY! i kept getting promotional emails from them that if i came back blah blah...and he threw in access to southbeachcoeds and some other crap site...
anyways, i figured ive been watching how often hes been updating and it started to pick up to roughly every 5 or 6 days..give or take...
sure enough!! as soon as i rejoin...no updates for almost 2 frickin weeks!!on this site...and forget about updates on those other two freebies..i doubt those will ever be updated again!!
in addition, he CLAIMS...all over the internet i might add...FEEL FREE TO EMAIL ME AT BLAH BLAH. "IM KNOWN TO GIVE VERY QUICK REPLIES"
YEA RIGHT!! UNLESS HE DEFINES "QUICK" AS "WEEKS"
anyways, ill give him 24 hours...otherwise..time to hit the "cancel" button...
Everything I wrote about Bikini Dream in my review remains accurate, but some of my comments about the network need to be clarified. Within the Bikini Dream site there are links to the sites that make up the network. I can’t confirm which they are. More on that below.
I used the TBP review page to access the sites and they list 17 sites as being available some of which (now, at least) are not part of the network. I was able to get access to Bikini Dream, Stunners, Ashlyn Brooke and All Anal XXX. I was not able to get access to Busty Café, Internal Violations, Stolen Porn Videos, Our Homemade Porno and Real Hidden Porn with my membership. To make matters worse, attempting to access all those sites caused my username and password to be blocked even from the sites that I did have access to. Apart from the sites I've listed I can't confirm access to the others as my membership was deactivated.
If my membership works again I’ll post a confirmed list of available sites on this network.
Since I've reviewed most of the other Brazzer's Pass sites and don't plan to renew my membership, I'm not sure if I'll end up reviewing this site. However, I did want to mention that it appears at first glance that this site will offer some more naturally endowed girls, which would buck a trend towards fake tits at the network of late. I don't know if it's because girls with natural tits and ass tend to be a little curvier (something I enjoy but I wonder if others don't) that their numbers have diminished of late, but it's nice to see a few who haven't gone under the knife.
This was originally intended to be a review, but...
It's been quite a while since I had membership at this site (around August 09). I wanted to write a review at the time so I took some notes, but then it got forgotten during my busy summer days... so I decided to post some things about it as a comment instead.
I joined because I received a 1-month special price for any kink.com site for $19.95 (not recurring). At this price I felt like checking out Public Disgrace, which overall brought exactly what I expected, nothing more, nothing less.
A few facts from back that time:
- Average set of pictures seemed to be usually between 130 - 160 pictures, but would range from 60 to 300 in some cases. There's an option for low (533x800) and high (1200x675) resolutions.
- Video length was around 60 minutes on average, while there were some clips that were only 20 minutes long, some were close to 90 though. You have the choice to download the scenes or the whole movies in 4 different formats: ipod mp4 640x360, hd mp4 (highest quality) 1280x720, hd wmv 1280x720, wmv 960x540 (and I could stream these too though); plus there's flash streaming too (selectable low, medium or high quality settings).
- Download speed varied between 400kb/s to 900kb/s (very satisfying), but when doing multiple downloads at once I reached the total of 1500kb/s download speed, which is straight forward great
- Updates seemed to come every 4 - 7 days
I missed that I had no access to any other sites of their network. On the other hand you do get some bonus, random hardcore material that's compiled from all their network's sites, plus you get the "Behind Kink" which shows you some behind the scenes stuff which was interesting.
I liked the site's design and structure, I thought it was very easy to navigate... at the time the only thing they lacked was a 'download all pictures in one' direct link, but that's about it. You can look up models, find out about all the scenes they did for Kink, and they also have a calendar where you can see the upcoming shootings.
As a side note, I feel pretty confident that all the action done by supposedly outsiders was faked. Also, in regards of the previous comment from mbaya about the legality of their outside actions, I do have to agree that it's somewhat worrying. I have not heard of any country in the world that would allow the possibility of underage people coming across public sex / porn filming in public, and there are situations where it's obvious that they just disregarded these regulations (where the tram or cars passed by, etc). Sure it's probably rather easy to get away with it on spot in Eastern Europe, but the fact that they - as a huge network - can get away with this on the long run and make money in North - America by selling the very proof of their irresponsible practices is somewhat concerning. Then I might be wrong.
Overall it was good but nothing extraordinary. As far as I know regular price would be $29.95/month, which I'd think is a little too much for what you get.
I've been back and forth to this site probably a dozen times over the last few weeks considering joining it. The public part interests me a lot, but I notice in some of the samples, there's quite a bit of bondage/pain in the scenes. I'm pretty familiar with Kink's sites and have liked the ones I have joined, but I'm curious about the disgracing part and to what extent it goes. I know Kink had one site, don't remember the exact name to make a link that had to do with water torture and thought it was too harsh for me to enjoy. I guess it's one of those things where the models obviously consent to it and I can convince my brain of that, but I can't find sexual stimulation from seeing a woman being hurt physically whether with her consent or not. Also am wondering how believable the sets are. Which is the only constant problem I've had with Kink sites and that is repetitiveness. Thanks in advance for any info.
Even though it's not marketed with any other networks, does anybody know what "family" this site belongs to? Kind of like how BrandiBelle is run by the Bang Bros people but it's not marketed or included in their network.
The tour of this page looks similar to some networks out there all the way down to design but I can't figure it out. There's a special deal if you are a Bang Bros member, but they have deals for Reality Kings, Twisty's, etc. as well so "Dancing Bear" is not necessarily run by them.
This site seems like an interesting genre that hasn't been touched, although I don't believe that the women actually doing the bj's or sex are "real women" as the tour videos say. It's probably like other reality sites (bang bus) where models mix in with "real women" in a real-life situation and the one's that actually start to do stuff for the camera are the models.
Protecting Minors We are strong supporters of RTA and ICRA, two of the most recognized self labeling organizations. Our site is properly labeled to assist in the protection of minors accessing inappopriate content. For information about filtering tools, check this site.
DISCLAIMER: ALL MODELS APPEARING ON THIS WEBSITE ARE 18 YEARS OR OLDER.
To report child pornography, go directly to ASACP! We're proud to be a corporate sponsor.
Have concerns or questions about porn addiction? We recommend this helpful resource.
