Heyo, just some stuff I noticed that might be useful (or maybe it's old news already) that I didn't see on the wiki page. I don't want to edit it because I'm not fully certain about this stuff.

Tumblr:

Seems to be allowing images greater than 1280x again.

Example: https://maxpawb.tumblr.com/post/189856511246/junebug
If you just right click -> view image, you'll be taken to the standard 1280, but if you left click a significantly larger image pops up. This only seems to apply to posts made a month or two ago and to my knowledge is not retroactive.

I use Image Max URL addon for Firefox and it doesn't catch that particular redirect. ("Image Max URL works by replacing URLs, and in some cases, querying website-specific APIs.")

DeviantArt:

Possible way to get a higher resolution.

Example: https://www.deviantart.com/nik159/art/Worlds-best-rabbit-officer-824111949
Clicking the little + magnification icon takes me to a highly compressed 71 kb version [I'd put links here, but these appear to be temporary links that expire quickly], but the addon I mentioned earlier redirects me to a 1302 kb version of the same resolution, but with far less compression artifacts. I'm assuming this is that API query thing they mention; I'm not really code savvy. This is nowhere near the original (inaccessible) file, but it could be useful if the artist does not allow downloads and there are no other sources.

A note of caution though, the redirects seem a bit finnicky and on rare occasion redirect to an image of worse quality.

Anyways, that's about it; just throwing some info out there in case someone finds it useful.

With tumblr, I would still try to get the content with blog export method. Tumblr did introduce new sample format, but it's still samples. Would need to check and add in the newer URL format.

With deviantart, changing q_75 from url into q_100 gives far less compressed version of the file. Other values in the URL seem to be protected somehow so you can't get larger resolution for example even if it's listed.

Wiki pages are free to edit by anyone. Just because I started it or if Booruhitomi has been maintaining it doesn't mean it's exclusively for janitors to handle.

As Mairo said, the wiki pages can be edited by anyone (although locked pages can only be edited by admins), and the new Tumblr method is getting a larger image, but it's still not the same as the original. That image in particular is even larger in its original form; the larger sample is 2048 by 2060, but I've downloaded the original version to my computer and it comes to 2149 by 2162. So we haven't quite gotten the old direct "raw" method back. Still though, I have added that info in.

As for DA, I did notice (and approved of) images posted here that were from q_100 samples, so I'll add that info in. I've also noticed something else relating to how DA display images now, but I've never got around to adding it to the wiki page, so I'm going to do so right now.

Ah, I was unaware of the q_100 thing. I double checked my addon and that does seem to be what it's doing (automatically redirecting to the q_100 version). Anyways, that's why I didn't want to update the wiki; I had figured my information was incomplete somehow and didn't want to give anyone the wrong idea. Thanks for updating it!

Alright, so with the new info in mind, I was observing the url stuff with DeviantArt and noticed something else.
Using this as an example: https://www.deviantart.com/teamwiwik/art/Ticket-591941701, which of course does not have download enabled.

Clicking the magnification icon and then clicking view image gives me this:

Version #1

https://images-wixmp-ed30a86b8c4ca887773594c2.wixmp.com/f/18e07a74-f27e-4f3e-b176-a688941cbc5f/d9sfd51-7fa1962b-1627-433f-b170-3dc14b60d279.jpg/v1/fill/w_1024,h_1024,q_75,strp/ticket__by_teamwiwik_d9sfd51-fullview.jpg?token= [FAT UGLY TOKEN]

99.86 KB (102,257 bytes)
1,024px × 1,024px (scaled to 944px × 944px)

So then, I change the q_75 to q_100 and get:

Version #2

https://images-wixmp-ed30a86b8c4ca887773594c2.wixmp.com/f/18e07a74-f27e-4f3e-b176-a688941cbc5f/d9sfd51-7fa1962b-1627-433f-b170-3dc14b60d279.jpg/v1/fill/w_1024,h_1024,q_100,strp/ticket__by_teamwiwik_d9sfd51-fullview.jpg?token= [FAT UGLY TOKEN]

585.28 KB (599,330 bytes)
1,024px × 1,024px

BUT, my addon redirects me to this:

Version #3

https://images-wixmp-ed30a86b8c4ca887773594c2.wixmp.com/intermediary/f/18e07a74-f27e-4f3e-b176-a688941cbc5f/d9sfd51-7fa1962b-1627-433f-b170-3dc14b60d279.jpg

This url doesn't seem to use a token.

415.82 KB (425,797 bytes)
2,362px × 2,362px

Version 1 and 2 are expected behavior, but I have no clue where my addon is getting the url for version 3. Any idea what's up with that?

Also, I manually compared #2 and #3. #2 is less than half the res, but has virtually no compression artifacts whereas #3 does have a bunch. Which is preferred in this case?

Somehow Deviantart has managed to take the cake when it comes down to being a complete and utter mess after the Wix acquisition...

Putting on passive aggressive mode now.

So what happened initially was that the URLs could actually be modified to huge extend, to point where it was easy to get original quality files by simple common sense. At this point deviantart/wix aknowledged the issue so e621 stance was that we would not allow these copies to be uploaded as artists have the options to choose sample resolution and if to disable download button by themselves.

After this the issue was "fixed" as in you couldn't no longer modify the URL by directly removing material from it to get to the original file. However it was pretty fast found out that adding in intermediary before /f/ in the URL would still give same results and that method still works to this day. However none of the artists on deviantart are conserned because they were simply told that everything is fixed. At least one positive thing is that this method currently only works on older material, newer material is not located in same directory and nobody has disclosed of finding new one.

Security by ignorance and we are at the point where users are extremely aware of this and if not, their scripts certainly are.

So at least to my knowledge stance is still same: you can only download files from deviantart which are meant for downloading, this means if there's no download button, then it's the resolution of bigger sample size. URL can still be modified as artists only select desired resolution for the sample and not the compression rate. So in this example case, #3 would be near ideal, but #2 is the best acceptable copy.

Mairo said:
So at least to my knowledge stance is still same: you can only download files from deviantart which are meant for downloading, this means if there's no download button, then it's the resolution of bigger sample size. URL can still be modified as artists only select desired resolution for the sample and not the compression rate. So in this example case, #3 would be near ideal, but #2 is the best acceptable copy.

Alright, so you're saying that #2 is the one I should upload because it's the resolution that the artist intended for others to download? I just want to be sure I understand correctly.

bonghit840 said:
Alright, so you're saying that #2 is the one I should upload because it's the resolution that the artist intended for others to download? I just want to be sure I understand correctly.

Yes.

Deviantart gives you couple choises when you upload material:

• Display size in width, from 400px up to 1920px
• Option to add automatic watermark
• Enable or disable download of original file
• Enable or disable the ability to sell download and/or prints from uploaded material

So because of this, the situation is already completely differend from Tumblr or Twitter for example. These websites never advertise the thumbnail sizes, they never technically intent for specific download option and they do not offer monetization from uploaded material. Some artists might assume that from e.g. twitter users can only access 1200px max resolution image files, even if that's not reality of the situation. Also deviantart requires you to upload the file in original quality if you want to sell it.

So it's like using neighbours wifi network because they use WEP which is technically cracked in 5 seconds versus using neighbours wifi which is unprotected. Practically both are same thing, but first one is neighbour being complete dumdum and you are breaking their locks made out of clay, while other is neighbour being dumdum and you are walking trough unlocked door normally.

Gotcha, thanks for the detailed response!