I know criteria on this website revolves around quality, but 80s-90s pictures can't rival current ones in resolution and detail. That's why I ask for there to be a more lenient rule regarding vintage media, as it's essential in gay porn history, and it seems to be under-reported here. I also ask because my efforts to upload images of 90s films and actors have been struck down even after enhancing and upscaling pictures (maybe that's not the reason, and if it wasn't, I'd like to hear really why). Thank you.
Topic on User talk:PeaceDeadC
Jump to navigation
Jump to search
Hey, it's just gotta fit the site's standards so everything stays clean and searchable.
Quick heads-up: our criteria already cut vintage material some slack. For frames/screenshots from those old movies, the minimum resolution is set at DVD quality (720x480) because that's literally what most of those films were mastered in back then (with a few rare exceptions). So it's not like we're holding them to modern 4K levels.
On the upscaling/enhancing thing if you don't have access to pro-level tools, it's honestly better not to upload the edited versions at all. Originals always win priority here, and upscaling can get messy real quick (artifacts, weird textures, etc.). We only recommend it in extreme cases, and even then it has to look natural. Another big thing that trips people up (and might be why your uploads got rejected) is the file naming. We have a pretty strict system to keep things organized and let the site's templates/automation work properly:
For performer headshots: It has to be exactly like Mark_Montana.jpg. No "MarkMontana1.jpg", no random numbers etc.
For movie covers:
- Front cover: Bro_Buddies_(Falcon_Studios).jpg
- Back cover: Bro_Buddies_(Falcon_Studios)_back_cover.jpg
You can drop the studio name if the title is super unique, but keep the format clean. It's a simple templating thing. If the names are off, the upload often gets auto-flagged or rejected even if the pics are solid.
Alright, thanks!