Forum
>
Site Discussion
>
Thread
Log in |
Register
Your image was uploaded second.
- your image id: 2372191
- other image id: 2371772
Additionally yours was a screenshot, which would make it lose whichever the upload order was.
The photo always was a screenshot. It was never released to be downloaded.
*Edit
If an image is in queue and someone uploads it directly is it the queued image that gets credit? I feel like it's a mad rush to be "the first" person to upload especially if you ran out of daily uploads and need to put it in the queue.
The photo always was a screenshot. It was never released to be downloaded.
Trust me, if an image displayed on your device, there's a way to download it directly without taking a screenshot. I assume this was an Instagram Story post or something?
If an image is in queue and someone uploads it directly is it the queued image that gets credit? I feel like it's a mad rush to be "the first" person to upload especially if you ran out of daily uploads and need to put it in the queue.
Yes, it's whichever was uploaded to the site first, regardless of whether it was queued or not.
The photo always was a screenshot. It was never released to be downloaded.
An image can always be downloaded, as chipperpip indicates, if you can see it in your browser. If you need some pointers on how to download we are willing to provide advise. For example, there are download tools for Instagram stories, videos and images.
If an image is in queue and someone uploads it directly is it the queued image that gets credit? I feel like it's a mad rush to be "the first" person to upload especially if you ran out of daily uploads and need to put it in the queue.
The id is an upload sequence number, irrespective of whether it went to a queue or directly went live.
A small doubt (in a positive way), why is the image is not being displayed in my profile (posted by me) or sef ?
nice one. thank youi
I uploaded this image/video and it has been merged. The other version doesn’t play at all. Would my version be the better one as that one can be played?
It plays back fine in Chrome/Edge and Firefox, but taking a closer look it's using the VP9 codec, which everything except Safari fully supports. I'm guessing you're using an iPhone or iPod. Can you tell me which version of iOS it's running?
(Supposedly, Safari added support for the codec a while ago, but the last I checked there was still an issue with it not playing it when inside an mp4 container file, which seems like it was getting fixed in iOS 18, but maybe it broke again)
I've changed the merge to use this one as the primary instead:
Which is in the standard AVC/H.264 codec that should work fine on everything, but is still 1080p, and higher-quality than your version. I'm curious if anyone running iOS 18 can confirm they're still unable to play the VP9 version.
I've changed the merge to use this one as the primary instead:
Which is in the standard AVC/H.264 codec that should work fine on everything, but still 1080p, and higher-quality than your version. I'm curious if anyone running iOS 18 can confirm they're still unable to play the VP9 version.
The VP9 version you posted does not play on my iPhone. iOS version 18.0.1
Thanks. As I suspected, it seems to be something that was fixed in the 18 beta and then broken again in the full release.
It plays back fine in Chrome/Edge and Firefox, but taking a closer look it's using the VP9 codec, which everything except Safari fully supports. I'm guessing you're using an iPhone or iPod. Can you tell me which version of iOS it's running?
(Supposedly, Safari added support for the codec a while ago, but the last I checked there was still an issue with it not playing it when inside an mp4 container file, which seems like it was getting fixed in iOS 18, but maybe it broke again)
I can confirm it does not play on my iPhone 12, using this version of the OS.
Looks to be ok on the site now
Yes, like I said I swapped it for the H.264 version someone uploaded. It's slightly lower quality at the same resolution, but it's guaranteed to work on everything.
I can confirm it does not play on my iPhone 12, using this version of the OS.
Seems like it'll still be a little longer before GWM can officially allow VP9 uploads. I was hoping that might be able to be announced around the beginning of next year, by when historically the majority of Apple devices should be on iOS 18+.
(If anyone is unaware of why it would be a nice option, VP9 is a more efficient codec than AVC/H.264, allowing for higher quality in smaller file sizes, and is the only thing the resolutions on Youtube above 1080p are available in. Note that VP9 is different from HEVC/H.265, which a bunch of other platforms and browsers don't fully support, and isn't likely to be an option anytime soon)
This has happened several times now where an upload I made was merged into a "duplicate", yet I lose credit and my username is taken away under the uploader section of the image.
It's also happened when something I upload was up long before a duplicate was uploaded.
I want to know when the other user uploaded that image above, because I uploaded mine literally 8 minutes after Yulia Glazicheva posted it (lucky timing).
This has happened several times now where an upload I made was merged into a "duplicate", yet I lose credit and my username is taken away under the uploader section of the image.
It's also happened when something I upload was up long before a duplicate was uploaded.
I want to know when the other user uploaded that image above, because I uploaded mine literally 8 minutes after Yulia Glazicheva posted it (lucky timing).
Yours was uploaded after the image yours merged into, so you don’t get the benefit of the credit.
damn so I was too slow? People are super sharp on this site haha
For any model that is popular, we do risk getting duplicate submissions. Also the image yours was loaded into was also one of the larger variants Instagram offers. I’m not sure which is the best tool for selecting the various sizes IG offers?
Yeah you're basically right, there are two ways images can get on the waitlist:
I think the second one of these is probably more common but I haven't checked.
I've been meaning to make the second case more similar to the first (so queue approvals would be posted to the site and on the waitlist, so no longer in the queue) but I haven't gotten around to it yet.