Posted under General
If you know any abandoned blogspot blogs hosting furry art, then archive them NOW!
I'm currently uploading the art from Tomcat's blog and would appreciate anyone pitching in: https://tomcatsemporium.blogspot.com/ (it has hire quality images than his furaffinity account, which he was locked out of)
doda58 said:
https://support.google.com/accounts/answer/12418290?hl=en#:~:text=When%20your%20Google%20Account%20has,notifications%20to%20your%20Google%20AccountIf you know any abandoned blogspot blogs hosting furry art, then archive them NOW!
I'm currently uploading the art from Tomcat's blog and would appreciate anyone pitching in: https://tomcatsemporium.blogspot.com/ (it has hire quality images than his furaffinity account, which he was locked out of)
I'm getting burned out on having to do this. :(
Oh, must sign in? Bah, can't even archive it properly, so that others can transparently access the old URLs.
Updated
[optimism]They are running out of servers[/optimism]
If you have an account, or you can get the direct URLs some other way, you can just archive those... sucks but oh well.
Alternative is to use your own logged-in archiving instance, and then create a Web ARChive collection.
Oh, haha, just block CSS. It'll archive them automatically as you click save while browsing. "###injected-iframe" if you want to also remove the banner.
Note: I replaced all the s200/s320/s400/s640/s1280 links with s1600, as I went so that it will archive those. AFAIK, those are the highest resolution you can get? Hmm ...
Example of changing URL based on that reference.
https://lh3.googleusercontent.com/p/AF1QipOX2mKwrFHfQM_MmBGpIpk9ZcanIOVGRiAvkMZ2=s45-c?key=CJyxk_SzgLmq-QE
https://lh3.googleusercontent.com/p/AF1QipOX2mKwrFHfQM_MmBGpIpk9ZcanIOVGRiAvkMZ2=s1600?key=CJyxk_SzgLmq-QE
So, apparently, if sXXXX is equal to or greater than the original resolution, then that's what you get. If you add -c to size, then it upsizes it even if it's say, a 20x20 original image. If you replaced s45-c with s1600-c, you get a fuzzy mess so don't do that! Removing the size entirely is apparently an option but doesn't seem consistent. Also, this is different style of URL than most of the examples from this blog. I think this is the newer format since it says 'key'. For what it's worth, I haven't noticed any above s1600, yet.
Documentation was clear as mud on what the size limits actually are. Apparently, 2048+ images need to be on your Google drive. Is the artist entirely vanished?
Updated
Tomcat is apparently active on twitter. https://twitter.com/Tarman133
I hate twitter because artists use it as a gallery when it’s not a gallery.
alphamule said:
If you have an account, or you can get the direct URLs some other way, you can just archive those... sucks but oh well.
Alternative is to use your own logged-in archiving instance, and then create a Web ARChive collection.Oh, haha, just block CSS. It'll archive them automatically as you click save while browsing. "###injected-iframe" if you want to also remove the banner.
Note: I replaced all the s200/s320/s400/s640/s1280 links with s1600, as I went so that it will archive those. AFAIK, those are the highest resolution you can get? Hmm ...Example of changing URL based on that reference.
https://lh3.googleusercontent.com/p/AF1QipOX2mKwrFHfQM_MmBGpIpk9ZcanIOVGRiAvkMZ2=s45-c?key=CJyxk_SzgLmq-QE
https://lh3.googleusercontent.com/p/AF1QipOX2mKwrFHfQM_MmBGpIpk9ZcanIOVGRiAvkMZ2=s1600?key=CJyxk_SzgLmq-QESo, apparently, if sXXXX is equal to or greater than the original resolution, then that's what you get. If you add -c to size, then it upsizes it even if it's say, a 20x20 original image. If you replaced s45-c with s1600-c, you get a fuzzy mess so don't do that! Removing the size entirely is apparently an option but doesn't seem consistent. Also, this is different style of URL than most of the examples from this blog. I think this is the newer format since it says 'key'. For what it's worth, I haven't noticed any above s1600, yet.
Documentation was clear as mud on what the size limits actually are. Apparently, 2048+ images need to be on your Google drive. Is the artist entirely vanished?
Yeah, I experimented with the url and noticed some of the images seem to be larger? e.g. https://3.bp.blogspot.com/-GTfTsdp25yM/TaZP6qt23EI/AAAAAAAABGc/mL9-73UEO3c/s5000/Syndicate+Comic+book+cover+Baby+Zyxxs.jpg (1367x2664)
Crap. I didn't know that before and uploaded some images limited to 1600 px dimensions. It seems to be only the comic pages that this applies to, but I can't be sure without going through all of them.
doda58 said:
Yeah, I experimented with the url and noticed some of the images seem to be larger? e.g. https://3.bp.blogspot.com/-GTfTsdp25yM/TaZP6qt23EI/AAAAAAAABGc/mL9-73UEO3c/s5000/Syndicate+Comic+book+cover+Baby+Zyxxs.jpg (1367x2664)Crap. I didn't know that before and uploaded some images limited to 1600 px dimensions. It seems to be only the comic pages that this applies to, but I can't be sure without going through all of them.
Well, for what it's worth, I stopped this process after a couple pages of image links. Also, finally got it to let me archive the database export of e621. It is not a horrible idea to do that every few months at least. Although, maybe we should have incremental backups that only include what's changed since the previous 'milestone'. It would be the difference between 1+GB and ~50MB or so?
If you can ask the artist, they can just download their entire Google account including Google Drive images like the one you mentioned that aren't saved at Blogspot's main image servers. It is notably well-drawn 'Bear' content, so I can see why fans want to not see it vanish.
:edit: Got back to it, and working on the huge list of links to archive.
As a note of something that came up: If you upload images from Blogspot, make sure you actually got the highest resolution available. If you request s9999, it'll just grab the actual size, not upscale. I already linked to documentation of this.
Updated
