neurovibe

@Charlie's Alter Ego Awesome, thanks!

"okay too" -> I think you meant perfect but I forgive your typo

Webitorial, will most likely soon be uploaded in better quality on his behance and/or official site Ph.: Konstantin Kryukovskiy • Date: posted Aug. 15 2019 • Source: his IG • Res.: 1350px Her face :

Mostly Dupes, Higher res' Most of these have been posted, now in higher res' & quality Ph.: Kseniya Vetrova • Date: posted early as June 6 2019 • Source: her site • Res.: 3000px her IG, posted Aug. 2 2019, 1350px:

Ph.: Marie Sheshko (aka jesuismariie) • for: 1811 • Date: posted Aug. 13 2019 • Source: Nastya's IG • Res.: 1349px Ph.: Elena Volotova • Date: shot May 5 2019 • Source: her IG • Res.: 1350px

Ph.: Alexander Sulzhenko • Date: shot June 16 2018 • Source: his site, his IG • Res.: 1920px, 1350px Ph.: Monika Leyendecker* • Date: shot Aug. 2019 • Source: her IG • Res.: 1350px *Yes, she usually does MUAH, but sometimes shoots

Ph.: Mikhail Kabochkin • Date: posted early as Jul. 31 2019 • Source: his IG • Res.: 1080px

Ph.: Evgeny Kuznetsov (aka Evgeniy) • for: My Dear Petra • Date: posted Aug. 5 2019 • Source: his IG • Res.: 1266px

Leyendecker & Guselnikov workshop (Aug. 2019) : Ph.: Danyel Weideman • Date: shot Aug. 17 2019 • Source: his 500px id: 1001625245 • Res.: 1015px Ph.: Pascal Thomas • Date: shot Aug. 17 2019 • Source: his 500px id: 1001643253 • Res.: 1015px

Some more: Ph.: Sasha Tereschenko (aka filmcomestrue) • Date: posted early as July. 6 2019 • Source: his VK • Res.: 2160px (although VERY grainy (ISO color grain, problem at the source))

Can't remember if this has been posted, or in this quality. It's from a Sacha Leyendecker workshop, shot Oct. 19 2018. I know Jorg Steffens was also there but I'd imagine he'd include it in what he had posted (he did have a similar shot, as did Sacha himself) and at the end of the day, I'm surprised to say this myself, but if finding who shot it takes 76 thousand hours, maybe it's just worth uploading the pic as is. Res': 1920px

Hm, apparently so. Although that happens often Off topic but I was thinking back and 2017 was a good year: 500px had more easily accessible files, tumblr had higher res' and nudity, Bellazon uploaded pics "as is" without recompressing

Gennady Lange, 1st upload January 2016, probably shot 2015. No, it's Maksim Serikow, it was in his IG Story temporarily.

Ph.: Anastasiya Veter • for: Fangahra Corsets • Date: shot Jan 26 2019 • Source: their IG • Res.: 1349px

Great! Ph.: Maksim Serikow • Date: posted July 2019 • Source: his IG • Res.: var (medium-small) We need higher res' of these 2 first ones, they're insane Ph.: Maksim Serikow • for: Yes No Maybe Store (finally have the photog name too) • Date: posted July 2019 • Source: his IG • Res.: 1350px

Adds to this set Ph.: Roman Romanovich (aka Onsen) • Date: posted early as Jul 11 2019 • Source: his IG, his IG 2 • Res.: ~1350px

Wow Ph.: Joerg Clephas • Date: shot Oct 21 2018 • Source: his 500px [ id*: 1000438993 ] • Res.: 2000px (uploaded size: 3861px) *including ID while someone figures out 500px's new method UPDATE: 2nd one considered "nude" so lower res' : 1000px, id: 311721147

Yah, it was (I know this is just a forget from your part, just don'T forget the nude spoiler). Date: shot Apr. 15 2018. 1500px Nudity:

@wndmkr Cool, thanks!

Good idea, for the TV via HDMI. I don't know if bandwidth is the correct term I used since yes, I know bandwidth (in all other senses and in home connections) is the amount per X time, such as volts vs amperage. I forget the word or maybe I used that word, every time I've coded websites or backends on servers, the hosting said bandwidth (or another word that I forget) as amount of data that can be served over a monthly invoice, thus my (maybe) confusion. I somehow always attributed traffic as unique users, maybe I was wrong. My reasoning, which I never apparently questioned post-2000's, was that the more unique visitors, the more bandwidth used. Well well Meanwhile on IG: Ph.: n/a • Date: posted early July 2019 • Source: their IG • Res.: 1350px

Hm, interesting, I'll try that out. Unfortunately I'll have to spoof the res', only my tv is 4k. p.s.: I think you meant reduce bandwidth, but yah, sounds logical

BTW, it's a shame I can't work on this right now, but if ever anyone of you guys or a guest reading this knows how to code, the json format file called which contains the URL (including for nudes, I tested) is sent through the http requests, so that's a good place to start

Hm. And you're signed in? That sucks.

Thanks! And awesome! I get 2000px res'. Ideally we'd get that extra 48px though. Check this one out: This image (known 2048px): https://500px.com/photo/284061713/anastasiya-by-chris-bos Link: Changing m= (m3%d) 2048 won't work though, neither the quality (q) setting UPDATE: No longer need to do that "right click" and selection source, just do view source. Ctrl+F this: og:image The 1st one (at least for now) is a meta tag containing that same URL. So meanwhile we have that I guess

Can you tell me when either one gets to work again? Sucks for your account though