Path: news.nzbot.com!not-for-mail
Subject: Re: pacific girls collection ... and some image-ripping tips
From: Randy Wang <abuse@localhost.localdomain>
Newsgroups: alt.binaries.nospam.female.bodyhair
Message-ID: <160820190855087131%abuse@localhost.localdomain>
References: <GWw5F.5538$to5.3058@fx04.iad>
Organization: Wang Labs
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1
Content-transfer-encoding: 8bit
X-No-Archive: Yes
Lines: 118
X-Complaints-To: https://www.astraweb.com/aup
NNTP-Posting-Date: Fri, 16 Aug 2019 13:55:08 UTC
Date: Fri, 16 Aug 2019 08:55:08 -0500
X-Received-Bytes: 6281
X-Received-Body-CRC: 3520155511
Xref: news.nzbot.com alt.binaries.nospam.female.bodyhair:8835
In article <GWw5F.5538$to5.3058@fx04.iad>, MrNeutron
<rtitter@titterscritters.org> wrote:
> Don't know if anyone has ever been to the vipergirls website but a
> full collection is being upped gradually. here is a link
Thanks for that. It's a good start. But wait, there's more!
Fun for the whole family! (Great gift idea!)
351 PG sets at:
<https://vipergirls.to/forumdisplay.php?f=302&page=1&pp=25&daysprune=-1&sort=dateline&prefixid=PacificGirls_com&newset=&order=asc>
-and-
178 PG sets (possibly some overlap with the 351? ... I dunno) at:
<https://vipergirls.to/forumdisplay.php?f=236&page=1&pp=25&daysprune=-1&sort=dateline&prefixid=PacificGirls_com&newset=&order=asc>
If you want reverse-chronological order instead of oldest post
first, then use these instead; they're the same except for "&order=desc"
(descending sort) instead of "asc":
<https://vipergirls.to/forumdisplay.php?f=302&page=1&pp=25&daysprune=-1&sort=dateline&prefixid=PacificGirls_com&newset=&order=desc>
-and-
<https://vipergirls.to/forumdisplay.php?f=236&page=1&pp=25&daysprune=-1&sort=dateline&prefixid=PacificGirls_com&newset=&order=desc>
What's the average number of images per PG set, 350 or something like
that? Then all of those sets together could amount to as many as
185,000 pics so far. (Yow!! Am I having FUN yet??) With more to cum,
of course.
For folks who are new to this stuff: You'll need a good image-grabber
extension for your browser. With a good extension, ads and malware
are skipped, invisible, when you go to get the images; at best, with
one click you tell the extension to snarf all of the full-size image
files linked to by a web page and store them in a directory of
your choice on your local disk. (It's magic!) Depending on the
extension and how bug-free it is, you might even be able to rip an
entire thread of pic-set posts, any number of linked web pages,
with a few clicks & keystrokes, then walk away (or do other things
on the computer) and let the stuff be downloaded for an hour or
three, filling up your disk drive so you'll need to buy another one.
(Let's see ... $80 for 4 TB now; not bad.)
(Clarification: This is assuming that you want to avoid using the
file hosts like RG, K2S, Vilechoker, etc. Many uploaders of pic
sets have done just that: avoided them. That's a Good Thing.)
There are discussions about this at VEF (there's usually a high
S/N ratio there), or you could do a web search and try
addons.mozilla.org and so on.
For recommendations of image-ripping browser extensions (BTW, not
plug-ins, very different from plug-ins):
<http://vintage-erotica-forum.com/showthread.php?t=370248>
imgding discussion:
<http://vintage-erotica-forum.com/showthread.php?t=355613>
Host Grabber++ discussion:
<http://vintage-erotica-forum.com/showthread.php?t=364181>
IHG discussion:
<http://vintage-erotica-forum.com/showthread.php?t=317039>
-and-
<http://vintage-erotica-forum.com/showthread.php?t=361359>
IHG is "ImageHost Grabber" and it's the best in a lot of ways, *but*
it doesn't work with Firefox versions beginning with 56, when the
Mozilla "Web Extensions" scheme (or scam) became mandatory. Details
from an IHG developer are at:
<http://vintage-erotica-forum.com/showthread.php?p=4030885#post4030885>
You could keep a copy of Firefox 55 to use with IHG, or you could
use the Pale Moon browser (which I guess is a sort of Firefox clone)
because it supports XUL extensions, which is what IHG is one of.
There are a few other obscure browsers that are similar to Pale Moon
in that regard; see the above VEF post. However, in the long run
it would probably be better to pay attention to the poster here,
who is also an IHG maintainer (bug fixer) and the author of imgding,
among other things:
<http://vintage-erotica-forum.com/showthread.php?p=4864688#post4864688>
His advice is: "And of course there is the classsic Image Host Grabber,
but it only runs on 'old' Browsers like Palemoon or Waterfox. I would
not recommend using those browsers in the long term. Sooner or later
they will be really outdated."
I'm a happy IHG user, a big fan of it, *but* I'm not using Wintel
computers and I am deliberately using an obscure off-brand Firefox
variant that also (like Pale Moon) supports XUL Mozilla extensions,
so I'm a special case. If you want to indulge in a little bit of
retrocomputing by indefinitely using old software and maybe even
an old computer, possibly just for this special purpose (image
ripping), that works great if you're OK with making those
adjustments to your computing habits. Otherwise, check out
imgding and Host Grabber++.
So what's the big deal about IHG, and why the loyalty to it?
Get this: It supports about a thousand image hosts, with a tailored
script for each one. You can edit the scripts to fix bugs if you're
technically inclined, and you can add your own scripts for new image
hosts that appear. The reason it's a big deal is that the techniques
that the various image hosts use to display their shit are changed
occasionally, to try to force advertising down your throat (because
of course that's their business model and the downloaders are using
the storage space for free although the uploaders may or may not be),
so a good image-grabber has to be extensible and maintainable or
it'll eventually become a lot less useful.
If you choose IHG, don't get it from addons.mozilla.org; go to
<https://imagehostgrabber.com> instead. If there is still a version
of it at mozilla,org, that one is ancient and unuseable.
|
|