Log in | Register
Forum > Site Discussion > Thread

Pictures that didn't make it onto the main site...

Aug 17, 2010 - permalink
These are pictures that didn't make it onto the main site for reasons unknown. Feel free to post yours here as well.

Aug 17, 2010 - permalink
Aug 18, 2010 - permalink
As promised in the other thread, I'll try to explain why each of these pics was rejected... or admit that it should have been accepted.

She's working out but there's not much visible muscle. Also she's in the corner of a pic whose quality is pretty crappy anyway.

Looks too masculine.

I could see an argument for too much of a masculine look - notice the sunken cheeks

Not a bad pic, though not much muscle besides the quads. Could have been accepted I guess.

Could see an argument for too much tan... but should probably have been accepted

Not much visible muscle.

No visible muscle, plus a bit too risque with the nudity.

Not muscular enough

Not muscular enough

Not muscular enough - athletic yes, but not really muscular

no visible muscle - she's all covered up!

Terrible image quality.

Not much visible muscle. Yes there's that calf, but besides that...

Not muscular enough.

Not muscular enough..

Should probably have been accepted... though the lack of face is annoying.

Not much visible muscle... one can tell she's athletic, but the (already pretty small) pic is zoomed out and because of the lighting she appears more skinny than anything else

This is a great picture. Should definitely have been accepted. Whoops...

Not muscular enough

Nice view, but not really much visible muscle.

Keep in mind that these are my opinions - I'm (probably) not the one who rejected most of these, and even if I did reject some, I can't remember, as there are too many pictures to go through. At least, I hope you understand better now...

Also, if anyone else wants to post rejected pics here for an explanation, feel free.

ace of spades
Aug 18, 2010 - permalink
Well. i tried to post some great pics of Michelle Andrea a couple of time, without results. Quality is good, maybe it was because of the too much masculine look?
Aug 18, 2010 - permalink
Can you put the actual pics here?

But from a quick google search, you're probably right.
Aug 19, 2010 - permalink

Nice view, but not really much visible muscle.

Not really much visible muscle? Pleeeaase! lol

IMHO the moderators should focus more on recognizing/remembering duplicates than rejecting great pics. I really don't visit this site daily but each day I do I see at least two or three newly posted duplicates.
Aug 19, 2010 - permalink
Not really much visible muscle? Pleeeaase! lol
Yeah, the arse is composed of the largest muscle(s) in the body. Hard not to see it ;D
Aug 27, 2010 - permalink
More pictures that didn't make it onto the main site...

Sep 22, 2010 - permalink
Got two more.

Sep 24, 2010 - permalink
  Why were last 2 of Sarah  left off? hot lady , good guns, great sport.
Sep 26, 2010 - permalink
RE fuk's four ab pics, above... they're not muscular enough. Yes, they seem athletic, and yes, they have a nice (even sexy) flat stomach, but in the end they're more flat than muscular.

RE her987's two pics: Those are both nice pics and they should've gotten up on the site. Whoops :(
Oct 14, 2010 - permalink
Chainer hit them about right on the money.

Picture number 2, never even made it to the too masculine stage, I saw the thumbnail with the 50 coats of protan and killed it there. (And I'm generally pretty lax on the tans)

If I remember the BW one correct, it was 1 of 10 all in a row and you really couldn't tell male / female from the picture. 3rd from the bottom. Dont recall to be honest, but I guess it was in a series of anorexic and petite ladies and was deleted on accident.
Oct 15, 2010 - permalink
RE: the Sarah Backman pics & RE: Michelle Andrea & RE: Heidi Vuorela (yes nobody asked but she's the worst for it)
There were already on the site at the time they were denied.

Dupicates always have been and always will be a problem.
None of us are the orginal photographer, for the most part we got them online somewhere we passed through.
And as soon as anyone modifies the original image and saves it, it is no longer the same image in the eyes of a computer.
This also leads to the problem of crops, which get cropped, which get cropped again. (On night I found 13 different images of the same photo, which was a morph to start with!)

The Uploader: Man I just posted a picture of some hot chicks abs, I hope it gets approved today!
Mod: Oh look guys, we have a winner, its the 50th Re-cropping of Andressa Vieira or Karen Zaremba's abs
(Yes, I had to look the names up for that one, you want names ask TL, Heck I do good to remember where I left my laptop! But anyways the uploader might not now who's abs they are, or that its a blow up image based on a cropped image from an original photograph, nor even the mod that gets it, but trust me someone somewhere, on this board will see the 3 freckles in the shape of the triforce and tell you that is Old Sister Puff-n-Stuff's Abs, from when she was 20 or younger, because she had them removed on her twentyfirst birthday which was 42 years ago.)

What we have here is a reoccurring problem and its a rather complex problem. (Not you, I just mean in general)
I would say maybe it lack of understanding of the guidelines, and peoples different perceptions.

Uploader is into
A.) Super-Steroid-Mankiller so big she cant be photographed she must be CGI'ed
B.) Ripped Pro-Bodybuilders
C.) Off-season Pro-Bodybuilders
D.) Ripped Pro-Fitness
C.) Off-season Pro-Fitness
E.) Ripped Pro-Figure
F.) Off-season Pro-Figure
G.) Ripped Pro-Bikini
H.) Off-season Pro-Bikini
I.) Amateur Bodybuilder / Fitness / Figure / Bikini
J.) Naturally muscled or gym going gals
K.) All girls are stronger than X
L.) No matter how big all girls are weaker than Y
M.) Which is for whoever the heck keeps uploading guys and naked guys!
N.) (Which is for No, No, and Hell No!) 5 year older with arms so big they cant be photgraphed they must be CGI'ed
and last but not least...
T.) (Yes T,which is for Trolls,) no matter which side of the line you stand, the troll will argue the other.
All of this leads to:

Uploader: Why wasn't my picture approved?!? 
Mod: Because it was already posted 12 different times.
Uploaded: But why wasn't MY picture approved.
Mod: Because the original was already approved or at least a better/higher resolution version was
The Uploader then continues uploaded the same image for the next 12 months until it either to slip past in with another group of pictures only to be deleted later.)

Before merge, the pecking order was Original-> Better Resolution -> Whatever cropped copy landed first

Age: I'm not going to lie if I have to really debate with myself if she's old enough, I'm going to can it, yes she might be a gymnast but if she looks 12, and she's not showing me ID, it's outta here
The Uploader then continues uploaded the same image for the next 12 months until it manages to slip past in with another group of pictures only to be deleted later.)
The Mod after 5 warnings later bans said user for 2 days, then 5 days, and then 7 days. 

Large Volumes of the same photo in the same clothes at the same place from a slightly different angle. ( It's part of a paid set of private photos and its mass delete.)
The Uploader then continues uploaded the same image for the next 12 months until it either to slip past in with another group of pictures only to be deleted later.)

Anorexic: Skinny & veins: do not equal muscle, just bending the arm doesn't do it, if i cant really see a visible muscle, abs, calves, bicep something in the pic, it's outta here.
(On the flip side, I've also canned some off-season pro-fbb's because in the photo it just looked like some fat chick bending her arms)

The Uploader: I've uploaded my picture 22 times and it keeps getting rejected
Mod: What was the picture?
The Uploader:
This one here

And this one

Mod: Where do I even start?
The Uploader: After a year of rejection, the user then starts creating a new account and re-uploads the same (insert number here) images every week.
And yes for the record those two pictures DO IN FACT, end up in the queue multiple times every week.
Now add all this up with our current user base, and you queues of around 2,000 images and nearly 25% of which is the same images, again and again
Also the rules are general guidelines, unless its a legal issue, its subjective to the mod judging the image at the time and his/her perception. A persons perception changes on a daily basis, I noticed that some days I'll approve a picture and see the same one the next day and go who the heck approved that one?!?! Other days I'm very strict to the guidelines.

Don't get me wrong gang I love what I do, I'm not real social, I come in, clean up the queue, and go and quite happy. But even my with the 3 Monitors and 81" of real estate on my main rig, and using zoom, its still just a row of four thumbnails unless you open a new browser or tab for each one. Things will slip, accidents will happen. And as my ex's are so fond of telling me, I do make mistakes from time to time.  ;D  But with the exception of the Sister's good name, none of this is even the least bit exaggerated.

(P.S. RE: Miss Red Thong, Didnt see any muscle in there to approve that, but I would damn sure bend her....... -Censored- and scream -Censored -

Please Stand By.... We are having Technical difficulties....
Jan 20, 2011 - permalink
Lol's to Phoenixhawk. Thats a quality post. He He :D
Apr 11, 2011 - permalink
First of all, my apology for posting this pic twice in this forum. I didn't discover this thread until just a minute ago. Second, please accept my applause for creating this thread for the purpose of transparency.

I really don't know for sure whether I should ask about this pic here, as I placed it on the popular voting queue instead of the staff queue. However, the last time I checked, it was getting all "Yes" vote, so I wonder whether it was rejected due to the staff's decision. If it was not the case, please disregard my question;
Apr 11, 2011 - permalink
That seems like a fine picture to me.

It is possible, though, that one of the mods recognized it as being from a paysite and deleted it for that reason.
Apr 11, 2011 - permalink
Many thanks for your answer, Chainer. I also want to ask about this pic, in order to have a clear feel of what your site is about, and be able to contribute to it more efficiently.

It is not a contest photo, and it is private, not taken from any pay site. Please see link.

Apr 12, 2011 - permalink
you should try uploading it the picture looks great

Thanks. The reason I posted it here is because it was rejected.
Apr 12, 2011 - permalink

I'm guessing this one might have been rejected because of:
No contest pictures or pictures with extremely dark, fake tans.
Apr 26, 2011 - permalink
I really like this site and I appreciate the amount of work and technical skill that goes into it, but picture posting is a problem here. I'm very careful about what I post in terms of quality, not posting duplicates, and avoiding pics with trademark info. Whenever I prepare to post a picture, I'll go to that woman's page to see what has already been posted. If I see one or more pics from the same photo shoot, it's obviously been approved and I'll go ahead and post one of those. I've done this too many times to count, and those pics almost always get deleted while the similar shots from the same shoot stay on the site month after month.

Again, there is a lot to enjoy here and I don't want to get too negative, but when it comes to posting pictures, it just isn't worth my time to go through my large archive and carefully select pictures that are just going to be deleted. I'll follow the rules, but the rules are far too randomly and inconsistently applied. Maybe you can clue us in to what the process is for determining what stays and what goes, because it's mystery to me.
Apr 26, 2011 - permalink
By the way, while you're answering my questions, why did I have to re-register in order to use this forum? It wouldn't recognize the user name or log in that I use on the main site.
Apr 27, 2011 - permalink
All of the following keep getting removed for one reason or another and I have no idea why.

Apr 27, 2011 - permalink
WOW girls
Apr 28, 2011 - permalink
Well pointed out, I never noticed that. However, that webite's no longer up so I don't think it's valid anymore anyway.
Apr 29, 2011 - permalink

#1 http://www.girlswithmuscle.com/57747/
#2 http://www.girlswithmuscle.com/4137/
#3 watermark
#5 " class="bbc_link" target="_blank" rel="noopener noreferrer">
#6 " class="bbc_link" target="_blank" rel="noopener noreferrer">
#7 The model has requested we do not post her pics
#8 " class="bbc_link" target="_blank" rel="noopener noreferrer">

I assumed #4 was a duplicate since I was the one who originally uploaded it, but it seems to have been deleted since, so that one is fair game. As for #9 I didn't delete it, so I couldn't say for sure, but I'd imagine one of the other mods judged the pic did not have enough muscle.  While we appreciate the uploads, in future please attempt to see if the pic is already on the site.
« first < prev Page 1 of 4 next > last »