New Rule At The Link O'Rama - No More Crappy Vid Caps!
 

I'm sick of seeing crappy vid cap content, so....

http://www.link-o-rama.com/greenguy/therules.htm

#25 - No more crappy vid caps for your pics - video camera's take movies, not still images.

(thanks to Cleo for the inspiration on wording the rule)

|bananna| |bananna| |bananna|

Been my rule for awhile. :)

Next we will start seeing pics taken with cell phones. :(

Nothing wrong with cell phone pics. I saw a 5 megapixel cell phone camera the other day.

This coming from a man who wants to watch movies on a MP3 player. |jester|

The pixel count doesn't mean crap for the most part. Many of the consumer cameras have a higher pixel count then the Nikon D70 that I'm shooting with. Actually often the ones with higher pixel counts have way more noise in the pics.

I am loving this new rule |roses|

Yeah... Those can really suck.

I already dont list them most of the time. And when I do I usually make note that they are vid caps or of low quality.

I try to cover this kind of stuff in my guidlines with:

'I also may not list content that I have seen alot (including templets) or feel is to low of quality.'

Damn I was about to do massive attack of freesites with ultra-crappy vidcaps :(


JK , vidcaps sucks :(

there are shitty video caps nad quality video caps ;)
the problem is there is too much shit instead of quality :D

Yeah I been rejecting for that, seems to be getting worse or people are using bad judgement when getting sponsor content..

Yeah. There's not much point in a sponsor capturing the images and making them available if they are dark, fuzzy, etc...

I coulda went longer without buying content if I used shitty vidcaps. But I just couldn't do that to anyone.

Even from the vidcap pics I use, I sometimes delete more than half a set to get a usable 24 pics.

Same rule at Megaporn.

One of my gripes with those damned caps is that they are already so damned grainy, it's hard to optimize them. By the time you're done the fuckers are so messed up you can't tell who the cock is attached to.

*hands on wide hips*.. i hope this doesn't include live action Cam snaps..i'm just now rebuilding my stock.. you know you cannot tell them enough.. Lighting, lighting, lighting.. cam girls, ya gotta love us!! *flashing eyes at MML*..


see i'm doing lots of *flashing* today..lmao

Do you mean something like this ?

kassander - no, it does not apply to thumbnail previews for movies :)

Greenguy - ok, and what about this gallery ? It seems to contain video caps as big pics. Do you accept pics with such quality ?
Sorry, I`m just trying to make it clear.

kassander - no, those are no longer allowed.

Are you not taking *any* vid caps anymore- even if they are sharp and clear?

Basically, any vid caps will be pretty iffy, huh?

If I looked at the image & didn't know it was a vid cap, I guess I'd allow it :D

;)

I mentioned this in another thread, but does this mean all of those link list that no longer allow video caps are no longer going to accept movie galleries? I'm sure it is pretty hard to get a photo quality shot off of a video that these webmasters would be linking to.

I can certainly understand not wanting 20 vid caps submitted as a gallery site, but really, how else are the webmasters submitting the video galleries going to be able to comply (or will they be able to)?

This has nothing to do with the thumbnail that leads to a movie on your gallery pages - I will no longer be accepting vid caps as the pics on sites :)

Okay....

Somebody help a newbie out over here... vid caps are pics that look like they are video camera stills? Is that it? Or am I just plain confused?

Yikes - that would explain a lot!!

I am going to need a proper definition so that I don't get rejected in my future site submissions.


Thanks In Advance!

|peace|

Vid Caps - Video Captures

Still images that are taken from movies & 99.44% of the time look like complete shit.

99.44%?

But how accurate is that REALLY? |jester|

Ok...does Quinlan know you talk about his work like this? |jester|

J/J

So when looking at ANY sponsor content, if it looks like its been shot at 1/1000 frames then forget about it?

|greenguy| ...give me a proper definition of acceptable pics and then we can put this topic to pasture - at least for a slow poke like me. :)

And don't be vague, and certainly don't keep repeating the definition of video caps. By stressing what video caps are, I am NOT 100% what you deem acceptable for pics - make sense?

BTW...What time you gonna be at the parking lot in front of your F250?

***GO STEELERS GO***

|peace|

Video cameras take movies, not pictures, so if the content was shot by a video camera, I will no longer be accepting it.

This isn't exactly a hard concept to understand :D

And it's not just sponsor content - any & all content that is a vid cap will be declined.

I guess no more reality freecontent |sad|

I hope my video caps fall into that .06%, because i've been perfecting mine since 1997. This is what a good video cap should look like:

http://www.nichemoney.com/KerriSable03.jpg

The trick is to use a 3 chip camera, and shoot in progressive mode. That way you don't get the tale-tell interlace lines through the movement area, or the jagged lines on diagonal lines after the pic has been deinterlaced.

YAY!

You don't know how much it pains me to see paysites and content producers offering vid caps as 'photos'.

We work so hard to offer high res pics and quality video, and it drives me crazy to see bigger programs giving their members less for their money.

on a different note; I think that cell phone pics are fine for the voyeur niche, as they add credibility to the scene.|snowman2

Plus, a lot of the amateur sites and DVD video sites like DeluxePass, AVP, Jans.

Most cases you can only promte those sites using the provided content. That's actually a rule with ARS4Real.

You mean when filming?

Is there any way to get a dvd screen cap that good? I've noticed doing it on different PC's does make a slight quality difference.