HQ PICS DOWNLOADS and Status List (MTG) 2013

[Huggybaby]

I would use bulk rename utility to delete the .xlhq.jpg and replace it with .full.jpg. There are other softwares too, just get a free one.

[Thalass]

Yeah, I looked into that too. Guess that's the way I'll have to do it if there's no other way. Just seems like an inconvenience though, seeing as the problem would be avoided if the files were named to specification in the online source folder.

Anyway, cheers. I appreciate the help!

[Wurm]

Hi, I'm here. I won't dissapear

You are wise.

25 downloads already. In the past I've had a similar response, but nobody ever helped find errors. They just want the torrent. Lets hope this time is different.

Are the 4KHQs and crops available for later?

PS If you had torrentzipped your sets I could try to join at a much higher percentage, it would be interesting to see.

Were any errors spotted in the torrent? (jpgs, zips, whatever). I took another look at it and it seems good enough.

I'd like 4KHQs, but are those actually made? The torrent in the first page only has 4KHQs for two sets and in the Mega folders I see 200 and 300 DPI only. Unless the a greater number of sets are done in 4KHQ, is there a point of making a torrent?

If no one picks them up I might do the crops, but I'm more interested in Promos. I still didn't get any of those. I'll see if there are enough of them to warrant a torrent.

Yeah, I would like to see descriptive folder names, along the lines of what we use in our folder structure for the current releases -- e.g. "KTK - Khans of Tarkir" and so on. The goal of this project is not to support any specific application that might need a predictable naming structure, so I would lean towards ease of human use.

That's what I originally had. See the spoiler in one of my previous posts:
viewtopic.php?p=187294#p187294

I even put them numbers for easier finding. I still keep that directory for my own use, and the torrent for seeding.


Regarding the naming, I like the "/Expansion Sets/Theros/THS-EN Crops 100DPI.zip" style.

But is it necessary in the torrent? Since everything will be "XXX-EN XLHQ 300DPI.zip". The "-EN XLHQ 300DPI" part could be added in 10 seconds with Bulk Rename Utility.

A script to make folders and rename according to a more friendly structure (like the one I had) would be nice. It would have to extract all folders, rename the three letter codes and move them into categories. I'll see if I find a way to do that.

Yeah, I looked into that too. Guess that's the way I'll have to do it if there's no other way. Just seems like an inconvenience though, seeing as the problem would be avoided if the files were named to specification in the online source folder.

Anyway, cheers. I appreciate the help!

The problem is that apps use different structures/naming. There's no one-fits-all.

[skibulk]

Please direct further file and folder discussion to New Folder & File Name Structure for Image Releases &Torrent

[Thalass]

I skimmed the last few pages and didn't see mention of it, so forgive me if this has already been asked: what's the status on the Battle for Zendikar scans? Any ETA on when we can expect them?

[kudit]

My database has some of that data already, such as Gatherer card name vs TCG card name, set, etc and MagicCards.info set shortcodes. I already have a script for generating Forge images and tokens so depending on the format, I could make a script that would generate tailored ZIP files for download that could be periodically or dynamically updated with the newest additions.

[Thalass]

For any MWS users out there, have you noticed that you can't make the Floating Image preview very large, nor very clear? I've updated all of my card scans to the 300DPI xlhq quality (and renamed them appropriately so they're appearing in MWS as they should), but when I use the floating image window to preview card scans the quality isn't much better than what I had before. You can drag the preview window to make it slightly larger, but it appears to have a max size that still isn't as large as the card scans, and it makes the card images rather fuzzy when stretched to the largest size. Almost makes me wonder if it's loading a lower resolution image and stretching it instead of loading the full 300DPI scan or something.

I looked in my preferences and couldn't find anything helpful. Under GENERAL, I have "high quality image generation (for modern computers)" already ticked, and in IMAGE VIEW both of the relevant settings are set to "full card image." I've also messed around with the render type in the preview window itself (internal rendering, full scan image, MTGIE picture, and printer mode) and they don't seem to affect the image quality whatsoever.

Is this a known issue? Is MWS not capable of displaying the xlhq scans at their highest quality? The images still look low res when viewed in MWS, but are very large and very clear when viewed in their respective image folders.

[Huggybaby]

Try using Fulls instead of XLHQs.

[Thalass]

Try using Fulls instead of XLHQs.

That's what I had there before, and they looked roughly the same. And to be clear, I renamed the XLHQs to .full so that MWS recognizes them properly. They SHOULD look much better (and they do if you look at them outside of MWS), but there's something weird about MWS' preview window that causes it to display them at a lower resolution.

Not a huge deal, but it makes using the XLHQs kinda of useless with MWS. I'm really eager to know if others have experienced the same, and if there's a fix for it.

[Thalass]

Here's two pictures so you can see what I'm talking about. In the first picture I've left the MWS preview window at it's default size, but stretched it to it's maximum size in image 2. You can see that the card image appears to stretch as well; notice how the text is blurry and the image in general is less sharp. Also notable is the fact that the image window can't even be made as large as the source image, which would be a nice feature for MWS to have, IMO. And here's a link to an imgur gallery in case something screwy goes on with the pictures. http://imgur.com/a/x6VOE Anyway, the pics:






Larger:

[Huggybaby]

There's nothing we can do as it's down to the resizing algorithm used by MWS and only the developer can address that issue.

[Wurm]

Hi,

It's time for a new torrent. Charlequin reprocessed the Theros block and Duel Deck Anthologies, they are now sharper and look better. It was the only thing that needed fixing. I also took the opportunity to TorrentZip everything so the torrent should check properly and only the new parts need downloading.

So, what you need to do:

1) Stop the torrent, right-click and "Delete and remove torrent" (NOT data) or whatever your client has.
2) From "Normal Sets" delete the BNG, JOU and THS zips, and from "Supplementary Sets" the four "DD3_XXX" ones.
3) Download TorrentZip
4) Extract anywhere and drag the "CCGHQ MTG XLHQ Pics" folder onto trrntzip.exe (this will give the exe the path to process)
5) Once finished download the new torrent below, point it to the folder where the CCGHQ one resides (*) and hopefully everything except the new sets should check.

(*) The torrent already creates the folder, so if you point directly to the CCGHQ one it will create another inside it. If you have "C:\Torrents\CCGHQ MTG XLHQ Pics" point the download to "C:\Torrents".

Well, these should be the step-by-step instructions anyone could follow. Now we are really and truly complete till new sets are released or the structure/naming convention is decided to be changed


Btw, shouldn't the first post be updated to reflect the new torrent?

[Thalass]

There's nothing we can do as it's down to the resizing algorithm used by MWS and only the developer can address that issue.

Right, I'm aware. I just wasn't sure if it was my MWS installation that was screwing things up since I hadn't heard anyone else complain about this issue, so I wanted to ask to make sure it wasn't just me, or some overlooked setting, etc. Should have been clearer about that, sorry.

Thanks for confirming that it's just a limitation of the resizing algorithm, though.

[Huggybaby]

Btw, shouldn't the first post be updated to reflect the new torrent?

Probably. I want to answer some things in the other thread first but I won't have time until this weekend. We really need Crops too...And are Fulls no longer being produced?

[charlequin]

Btw, shouldn't the first post be updated to reflect the new torrent?

Probably. I want to answer some things in the other thread first but I won't have time until this weekend. We really need Crops too...And are Fulls no longer being produced?

I do fulls and XLHQs for every release and three sizes of crops for every release where they make sense (not promos with weird frames, for example.) I want to separate what we generate and release (which absolutely should stay as every supported size) with what goes in the default torrent, both for convenience of maintaining the latter and for having our biggest and best size as the "standard" which other sizes are basedo n.