BigPics?

[Jeffrey99]

Hey Rob, was just wondering if you plan on uploading anymore of the BigPics? Or is that pretty much dead? It looks like there haven't been any updated since 08. So was just wondering if you were planning on uploading any more if you felt it wasn't worth the hassle?

Of course my vote would be to make all images the current resolution and the HQ resolution but that's just me. :D

[FTVGirls_Rob]

On thebestporn.com it seems that if you don't have bigpics its the end of you. Nothing else matters. Hence a site like metart rules.
If I had my wish, I'd have both the 1600px and the 4200px pictures on FTV, but converting my raw pics to the 4200, is pure death on time and the processor. It takes long enough just to get them at 1600. But there is also another reason -- since I don't sharpen, airbrush, heavy-megalomaniac-ultra-fix the photos (which every single site that posts superpics does), some girls will not look good with all the 'flaws' that show up at such resolutions. And I don't have time to follow the sharpen, airbrush, heavy-megalomaniac-ultra-fix process.

[Mel]

Rob-Bot does NOT sleep!:D

[Jeffrey99]

On thebestporn.com it seems that if you don't have bigpics its the end of you. Nothing else matters. Hence a site like metart rules.
There is a reason for that. Computer monitors are getting bigger and bigger. With bigger monitors come's bigger resolutions. I've just got a crappy 19" widescreen and I'm running 1440x990. Hell, some people are even hooking the PC's up to their TV's to use as monitors or viewing images/videos on the tv via PS3, 360 or a media player. I couldn't even set your image as a PS3 background, as it's 1920*1080, without stretching it. And we all know that stretching it will look like crap.

Just like how now days people look at older images(640x480) and don't even think it's worth keeping anymore, with everything getting bigger and bigger that's why people at TBP prefer HQ resolutions. Who knows how big monitors will be in 5 years or even how we'll be viewing them.


If I had my wish, I'd have both the 1600px and the 4200px pictures on FTV, but converting my raw pics to the 4200, is pure death on time and the processor. It takes long enough just to get them at 1600.
What's their native resolution? Why not do one at the current standard and then one at their native resolution? You wouldn't have to convert anything more, just upload the default resolution from the camera.

But there is also another reason -- since I don't sharpen, airbrush, heavy-megalomaniac-ultra-fix the photos (which every single site that posts superpics does), some girls will not look good with all the 'flaws' that show up at such resolutions. And I don't have time to follow the sharpen, airbrush, heavy-megalomaniac-ultra-fix process.

I know you think you are the only site that does this kind of stuff, just like you thinking you having the smallest watermark, however I'm gonna have to disagree with you. Not every site with HQ image resolutions photoshop their images. Do some? Sure but not every. Why would a site airbrush photos just to then have HD videos? You can't airbrush videos, I really don't see where the advantage would be. Sounds like a waste of time, resources and money.

And if flaws were your real concern, I don't think you'd have 8000kbps HD video on your site. I'm pretty sure any flaws that would be visible on a HQ image, would be visible in a HD video. And we all know people will bitch about this flaw or that flaw with or without HQ images.

[FTVGirls_Rob]

A 4000 pixel photo will be a lot more sharper and more detailed than any hd video. That is why HD video is 1900pixels. My 1600 pixel photos would be more equivalent to an HD Video 'Still' or screenshot.
8000kb/sec just makes each frame clearer, and less grainy in compression.

I run under a 1920x1200 pixel desktop, and a dell 28 inch flatscreen monitor. Even for me a bigger picture than 1600pixel forces me to scroll to see the whole pic. Even my pictures still need to be scrolled.

What is truly the most rediculous about bestporn reviewers, is that they will review something negatively about a site even if its not something they can use/apply or even care about. Just because it is or isn't there, its something they must hate on. But its always the same thing, and they won't even see the real quality and uniqueness of what the site offers. I still would like to see even one review on there that even micro-mentions the model narrations, videographer notes, the real nature of what is actually being shot. But whatever.

[FTVfanatic]

I personally see no need for higher resolution images. Yes, I only have a 20-Inch display on 1680 x 1050 resolution, but who would want to have images so large you can not view them at 100% magnification? When the image size is reduced you get jagged lines and poor image quality.

The best part is that the current image size (resolution) here at FTV Girls just happens to be 1600 x 1064, so I can view every models' photos at the original 100% magnification and the images fill my screen near perfectly. Even the large screen displays usually have not much more resolution than the Full HD resolution of 1920 x 1080. Thus, I think 1600 x 1064 is a pretty good compromise on the resolution for many members.

just my 2 cents.

[Jeffrey99]

When the image size is reduced you get jagged lines and poor image quality.

I've never seen that. I have 4000px MetArt images that I can reduce to 1064px and I see no jagged lines or poor image quality. Now if you try to reverse it, go from 800px to 1064px, then you will get those issues. So I really don't understand where your coming from.

I still would like to see even one review on there that even micro-mentions the model narrations, videographer notes, the real nature of what is actually being shot. But whatever.
Because maybe they are like me and don't pay any attention the things mentioned above. I'd rather have 3000px or 4000px images then to read what the model or the videographer had to say. Sure the interview videos are cool but other then that, I never read anything else. I'm not here to read. LOL

[Internetvidz]

I for one am fine with the photos as they are...FTV = first time VIDEO, that is what I am here for, the vids. The photos are good to have, but no need to make them the pinnacle of the site.

Besides, those monster res large photosets take forever to download (even zipped) and just take up more room on my FTV hard drive (yes I have seperate portable drive JUST for my FTV content)

Keep things going as they are Rob, all is perfect for most of us!

[Geezer]

I download almost all the model's photo sets but only some of the videos. And, even though I put them on my hard drive, I rarely watch any of them. I'm more of a "collector" than a "viewer" I guess.:D