Because Siddharth's version was 1080x1920, and the other two were 720x1280.
That said, looking at it closer the higher-res one seems like it might just be a conversion of the HD HEVC Tiktok version, and the clarity was actually slightly less than the Instagram ones, so I swapped the merge order to have yours as the primary (the first of the 720p uploads).
Theoretically it might be possible to do higher-quality conversion of the HD Tiktok one, but there's a whole colorspace conversion issue I don't feel like dealing with at the moment.
It would be useful to have a [NOT] or an [exclusive] search condition, some sort of Boolean logic to filter out certain tags. Right now, there's no way (as far as I am aware) to only show images without a selected tag.
Example: If I want to find images of biceps and abs that don't include quads, I might ask for:
Include "biceps". Include "abs". Exclude "quads".
The search algorithm then pulls all images featuring biceps and abs, and if any image contains any mention of quads, even alongside biceps or abs, it filters that out.
I got no idea how this site runs, but if it's a solution like maintaining all existing tags, and just having it so that an apostrophe at the end signals a [NOT] condition, maybe that's a fix. Then the previous example can be typed in the search bar like:
She's a very unique case too. She actually has pictures on her Instagram where she is at a public pool totally topless, and nobody knows that she is female. Her chest looks exactly like a male's chest. I'd post the picture here but I'm not sure of the rules in a thread.
Trying to figure out why my post was deleted, but this is okay which is the same thing in my opinion.
Because with things that close to being over the line, there's going to be some subjectivity. Yours had more visible areola, I'd say is the main difference. More complete censoring might work, but if you don't want any chance of your uploads being removed, just don't bother uploading anything that borderline.
Because Siddharth's version was 1080x1920, and the other two were 720x1280.
That said, looking at it closer the higher-res one seems like it might just be a conversion of the HD HEVC Tiktok version, and the clarity was actually slightly less than the Instagram ones, so I swapped the merge order to have yours as the primary (the first of the 720p uploads).
Theoretically it might be possible to do higher-quality conversion of the HD Tiktok one, but there's a whole colorspace conversion issue I don't feel like dealing with at the moment.
I am on GWM quite a lot, usually for several hours every day. I do take the occasional week to 10 day vacation (and most often for no particular reason), but GWM is probably my favorite website after Youtube. I wouldn't pay for it as I have never had (20 years now) any paid subscription to a website. I was around in the early days of Computing, when people would hand you 20 floppy discs of programs for free (this was before Microsoft got that market). I used machine code and had a green cathode tube, things are better now...much better, but I enjoyed the free and easy way of the late 70's and early 80's.
I actually find some of the discussions here fascinating. Obviously the pictures and videos are great, but it's nice to be able to have intelligent discussions with others who share the same interests.
@ElsieGuen: "there aren't many users here who are enjoying his low quality uploads...." How do you define "low quality" or "high quality?" Your definition may not agree with mine. I continue to add names on tempp's uploads when I have time and I do enjoy his/her uploads.
@"the complaining guy:" "it's just annoying" and "also annoying." As I just wrote, I'm fine with the quality of his/her uploads and commend him/her for a job well done.
Log in |
Register
Thanks for responding man, I truly appreciate it.
I think also the same case with the video too.
Looking at this image, I’d be questioning whether this would fall under the “not enough femininity” rejection reason?
It would be useful to have a [NOT] or an [exclusive] search condition, some sort of Boolean logic to filter out certain tags. Right now, there's no way (as far as I am aware) to only show images without a selected tag.
Example: If I want to find images of biceps and abs that don't include quads, I might ask for: Include "biceps". Include "abs". Exclude "quads". The search algorithm then pulls all images featuring biceps and abs, and if any image contains any mention of quads, even alongside biceps or abs, it filters that out.
I got no idea how this site runs, but if it's a solution like maintaining all existing tags, and just having it so that an apostrophe at the end signals a [NOT] condition, maybe that's a fix. Then the previous example can be typed in the search bar like:
Tags: biceps, quads', abs,
I apologize for the novel. Thanks.
Well I'll post it here so you guy's can see and enjoy hopefully doesn't get taken down I don't know the rules either
She's a very unique case too. She actually has pictures on her Instagram where she is at a public pool totally topless, and nobody knows that she is female. Her chest looks exactly like a male's chest. I'd post the picture here but I'm not sure of the rules in a thread.
Because with things that close to being over the line, there's going to be some subjectivity. Yours had more visible areola, I'd say is the main difference. More complete censoring might work, but if you don't want any chance of your uploads being removed, just don't bother uploading anything that borderline.
Because Siddharth's version was 1080x1920, and the other two were 720x1280.
That said, looking at it closer the higher-res one seems like it might just be a conversion of the HD HEVC Tiktok version, and the clarity was actually slightly less than the Instagram ones, so I swapped the merge order to have yours as the primary (the first of the 720p uploads).
Theoretically it might be possible to do higher-quality conversion of the HD Tiktok one, but there's a whole colorspace conversion issue I don't feel like dealing with at the moment.
Trying to figure out why my post was deleted, but this is okay which is the same thing in my opinion.
A small doubt (in a positive way), why is the image is not being displayed in my profile (posted by me) or sef ?
https://www.girlswithmuscle.com/2360934/
Same. That's why I asked about this a few weeks ago. I'm using a Firefox extension mentioned in my string and it works nicely.
Yes! Thank you! This works just fine.
I would absolutely LOVE that. I have sensitive eyes so this huge field of eye-searing white is kinda rough.
I am on GWM quite a lot, usually for several hours every day. I do take the occasional week to 10 day vacation (and most often for no particular reason), but GWM is probably my favorite website after Youtube. I wouldn't pay for it as I have never had (20 years now) any paid subscription to a website. I was around in the early days of Computing, when people would hand you 20 floppy discs of programs for free (this was before Microsoft got that market). I used machine code and had a green cathode tube, things are better now...much better, but I enjoyed the free and easy way of the late 70's and early 80's.
I used a dark mode addon but it would sometimes invert the colors on pictures.
I like to read the forum when I wake up or a few hours later. and then enjoy the gallery about 2 to 5 times a day.
Almost every day! Several times a day, these girls drive me nuts I am obsessed with them!!
if only every one commented and on some of the threads I started so enthusiastically ..I have 2 days off a week from GWM
same for me also it is free
This works wonderfully!
I have dark mode for android
1.Open Google Chrome on your Android device.
2.Type chrome://flags in the address bar and press Enter.
3.In the search bar at the top, type “dark”.
4.Look for the option labeled “Auto Dark Mode for Web Contents”.
5.Tap the Default dropdown and select
6.Enabled. Relaunch Chrome to apply the changes
the site was super laggy for me last night but its fine now
@ElsieGuen: "there aren't many users here who are enjoying his low quality uploads...." How do you define "low quality" or "high quality?" Your definition may not agree with mine. I continue to add names on tempp's uploads when I have time and I do enjoy his/her uploads.
@"the complaining guy:" "it's just annoying" and "also annoying." As I just wrote, I'm fine with the quality of his/her uploads and commend him/her for a job well done.