FA+
Shop
Follow-up, we got FA+ (and it didn't fix the problem.)
3 years ago
Specifically Koopacap got FA+ and has been experimenting with it in his scraps uploads ( https://www.furaffinity.net/scraps/koopacap/ )
What we've found is a bit more disappointment.
In addition to the total pixel count limitation (3.7mp and 8.3mp with FA+) - there is a hidden 6000 pixel per side limitation to uploads regardless of being a paid user or not.
Essentially, he uploaded 3 older sequences without FA+ to see how it resized them and the results weren't too great, but not awful - you could read 2 of then ok, but the 3rd wasn't that great. They were all on the verge of being too small. They looked worse because they were tiny, and you can actually check all 3 original uploads in his main gallery for direct comparison of the old unlimited format and how much better they look there.
The FA+ results were worse than expected by a lot though. Because of the hidden 6k pixel per side limit, 2 of the uploads barely got any larger and one of them was already at the 6k pixel cap without FA+
Paying to upgrade to the new FA+ cap did not solve the issue of sequences being overly crunched and he basically needs to change his entire sequence style if he wants to upload still.
Similarly doing the math the DCBK sequence I have uploaded would have to be a bit over halved to be uploaded again, and even with FA+ it would not improve in quality (it would be at the hard 6k pixel cap), similarly to one of the sequences Koopacap tested with.
Just thought people doing wide/tall images might be interested in a followup after we got FA+ to see if it helped.
What we've found is a bit more disappointment.
In addition to the total pixel count limitation (3.7mp and 8.3mp with FA+) - there is a hidden 6000 pixel per side limitation to uploads regardless of being a paid user or not.
Essentially, he uploaded 3 older sequences without FA+ to see how it resized them and the results weren't too great, but not awful - you could read 2 of then ok, but the 3rd wasn't that great. They were all on the verge of being too small. They looked worse because they were tiny, and you can actually check all 3 original uploads in his main gallery for direct comparison of the old unlimited format and how much better they look there.
The FA+ results were worse than expected by a lot though. Because of the hidden 6k pixel per side limit, 2 of the uploads barely got any larger and one of them was already at the 6k pixel cap without FA+
Paying to upgrade to the new FA+ cap did not solve the issue of sequences being overly crunched and he basically needs to change his entire sequence style if he wants to upload still.
Similarly doing the math the DCBK sequence I have uploaded would have to be a bit over halved to be uploaded again, and even with FA+ it would not improve in quality (it would be at the hard 6k pixel cap), similarly to one of the sequences Koopacap tested with.
Just thought people doing wide/tall images might be interested in a followup after we got FA+ to see if it helped.
I recognize that all the tests I uploaded with or without FA+, are technically readable in a sense. I've gotten a lot of feedback about that.
There are things you don't want to see on the works you upload, like aliasing around the font and linework. Readable yes, but not ideal. We strive to a level of clarity because it justifies the work put in.
And yes, we can technically segment our sequences into parts. Personally, i'm not a fan of that for creative purposes and networking purposes. Having a sequence in one place makes it easier to share and consume. A lot of my work gets shared on discord and other websites (which drives a majority of my traffic here). By dividing narrative threads into multiple parts, we risk making that sharing aspect more difficult. Now this is fine for stuff like like webcomics that are posted as they are done.
For me, I tend to finish the whole sequence, and post it as a whole. I am willing to adapt if necessary, but I feel it's a net negative overall.
The size limit is completely arbitrary to make people pay for FA+ and it still doesn't deliver what we had before.
While I know that furry artists are quite prolific, I find it hard to believe that the community has already filled up the new storage so much that they have to limit file size and resolution in such a way. Also, if the problem is only storage, why don't they just buy more storage, using donations and money from the FA+ program, since it's supposedly what it should be used for. Limiting file size is just delaying the inevitable if the storage is already close to full. Plus, why don't they also announced it and said they were looking to buy additional storage ?
And then on top of it, paying for a sight to prone to being taken offline for the smallest of things. Shame it's hardly even worth it
Arbitrary limits are arbitrary (6k limit for a side)
That bandwidth utilisation could be monetized in some way, such as inline adds between the picture and the comment section.
If 'size' is an issue, FA could implement multiple resolution uploads, like wiki has. The default rez can be small, limited. The artist, if they desire, can upload a high rez that suits them, or multiple resolutions. We already were used to that step with the "secret" method. The thumbnail clickthrough can go to the smaller by default.
Maybe a FA+ allows you to change that default to biggest. Ie, viewers can pay for the convenience of being a bandwidth hog.
I'm not paying for the option to upload bigger. I'll just link to an external site that has monetization like Onlyfans, Patreon or Subscribe Star.
There is no reason on Earth this should be the case. FA+ came a GOOD while after and even with all that monetary gain they somehow can't afford more storage space?
This does nothing but shaft their userbase and proves that FA+ is basically useless.
I'm seriously considering removing my subscription now and likely will if this decision doesn't revert itself.
I don't even use FA+ for anything other than icon upload limit or thumbnail count so I don't think it will hurt me any.
To be as charitable as I can be, I assume they removed it in an effort to prevent people from thinking the new max resolution for free users was 6000x6000 (Which did trip a good number of people up in the comments of the tweet I linked), but removing that warning is definitely the wrong choice, as it could easily mislead someone into buying FA+.
Edit: Wait, in my screen shot they even changed the wording from "images larger than the maximum resolution or dimensions will be resized down to the site limit" to just "images larger than the maximum resolution will be resized down to the site limit."
Again being as charitable as I can, I really hope that was done in preparation to remove the 6000x6000 cap.
What they should have said is "max resolution along one side of an image is 6000 pixels" - or something like that. 6000 on either side is the cap, 2880 x 2880 would be the max 1:1 sided image. So you can either hit the megapixel limit or the max pixels per side limit, whichever is hit first. 6000x6000 was probably just an error when communicating the side limit.
The thing is, I don't know many artists who even understand these parameters, much less use them when making art. It's just a weird way to limit image sizes when image file size has been a staple and more direct way to limit image file sizes since the dawn of image formats. I don't get why they are beating around the bush on this one other than possibly wanting to sell this as a feature by providing an annoyance.
Except that the people who would find this annoying run up against the 6000 pixel per side limit before they hit the megapixel limit, and the megapixel limit is the only one that FA+ removes, the 6000 pixel per side cap isn't touched. This doesn't even solve the issue for most people that would want to upgrade to FA+ for a better upload experience.
Costwise, the limits make no sense to me. CDN bandwidth is cheap, especially since FA is using cloudflare (which gives unlimited bandwidth). Reliable storage you can get at $0.005/GB/Month -- plenty for anyone paying for FA+.