Ye Ol' Comments Page

luretmo19, you were warned about not using categories correctly. You failed to improve and continued to upload walls to the wrong category. Not to mention the all the walls you've flagged incorrectly...

@CWSobaki: we don't judge quality based on how an image may or may not look at a scaled resolution.

x256: you're still talking in your own terms of quality. The staff and a portion of the community (based on reports) have a general consensus. More than that, quality isn't our only consideration - content is too. Quality doesn't factor in if we're dealing with something like CP (to use an extreme example).

Also, <20 is just not a good sample size. ;)

@0scar: kindly check the links in the notice here.

I want to ask what is the reason for tags to multiply, is it site error or someone is doing it for some purpose? Examples: http://alpha.wallhaven.cc/wallpaper/170158 http://alpha.wallhaven.cc/wallpaper/197549

"We are strongly considering implementing a minimum of at least two tags per upload." How long does this site exist - 4-5 months? I am wondering if it's really so difficult to include 'Minimum Tags on uploads' on this site?

Cryzeen: this can happen if the user manages to hit Enter twice before the site registers it as already added, or when a wall is grouped and the tags moved over aren't checked against the existing ones. We'll get around to fixing it - tagging will be reworked.

@dwemer: it's not difficult in theory, but we have dozens of small things like this needing done, all while trying to add major features like a forum. Regardless, we watch and warn uploaders who tag insufficiently or not at all.

Cryzeen cfunk In most cases it's the broken wallpaper grouping. The way tags are handled in that case is broken.

@dwemer you're welcome to join the dev team and implement it yourself ;)

If the domain 'cc' is removed from the text form, and thumbnails of featured walls are posted, then, either people may use search engine for 'Wallhaven', or the complete domain name can be added to the cover image. That way crawlers and bots may be deterred. Source: not a webdesigner :)

Gandalf: @dwemer you're welcome to join the dev team and implement it yourself ;)

Gandalf sounds like nobody is actually implementing anything :P

Glur4k: real life gets in the way sometimes. Isn't that just the darndest thing? The forum is making progress, and we just got some sexy new JS spinners. That's probably more than the US government has done in the past year.

@bman214 You should be able to download any wallpaper you see on the site (right click -> save as…). If you want to filter search results use the purity buttons (sfw/sketchy/nsfw) in the search bar.

Yayyy, someone is reviving what wallbase did. I'm so happy.

I'm looking for wallpapers for my android and was wondering if there will be an option to have wallpapers who's height exceeds their width (aka vertical wallpaper)

Also small tagging suggestion: How about allowing actor, models or brand names be moved to the top of a tag list, or be uniquely colored?

I noticed that it's currently possible to favorite one's own uploads. Is this intentional?

hey guys I love your website, have been using for couple of years (before and after it became wallhaven) only two features that bother me at this time are the loading of images only when I scroll down to them (that was an option on the first website), the other is the page I directly get when I open a tag, it just feels like an extra step that I have to do every time while I will just go for more of images of the Tag anyway)

I know the website is still WIP at this moment so just thought I would voice my opinion just in case

thanks a lot guys for the for all work!!

maganinooo The lazy loading on thumbs makes the page load faster and reduces stress on the server. I don't think we'll make it optional. As for the tag pages, I might try to sneak in a few more shortcut buttons to get straight to the search. No promise though.

cwook Yes, why not?

@ferdaus Context?

momoe We're going to redo the search interface at which point it'll also be possible to search for vertical resolutions. As for the specialized tags, those kinds of things may happen further in the future, but for now we still need to care of some more basic things.

why punished me?

Nortrom There will!

And will there be a "search by picture" option in the future? Wallbase had one

Apparently "Wallbase had it" turned into some sort of magic spell that makes features appear. :D

For those with double 16:10 computer monitors.

I have noticed a lot of my walls are being deleted for low resolution. I understand that not all resolutions are accepted and so there is a minimum resolution to be accepted. For these deleted walls that I have posted they meet the minimum requirements for upload but I know that if the walls are stretched out fully yes they might not be fully clear and crisp. So my question is to what degree is this being measured or is this just the opinion of whoever is deleting them cause I would rather NOT share the wall if its just going to end up being deleted as it makes more work for you guys. I am fine with all the walls I have uploaded as to their resolution. But I am also not using a 55'' LED tv to run my computer on as well. To what point are we to accommodate people with ridiculous resolution screens. Cause pretty soon anything under 4k resolution will be considered low resolution.

Brokenvegetable Distinguish between resolution and quality. Our minimum resolution for uploads is 1024x786, which is ridiculously small for a wallpaper. However whatever you upload should be in it's original resolution, never upscaled. Upscaled images are pretty obvious if you look at them in full view and will be deleted. It's actually pretty simple. Also you really don't have to worry about 4k. If you look at market shares, even FullHD is still well above average.

@CWSobaki: if you're talking about a high-res wall that was deleted for being low quality, then if you upload a size that looks more acceptable, yes, that's totally fine.

1. Please make the icons at the top left of the page more transparent. i feel the colours look cheap. 2. the scrolling isn't as smooth as I remember WB being When scrolling through wallpapers). Hopefully you guys can make it smoother. Those are the only two problems I have, really. The site is great otherwise.

Right now the resolution filter just works for specific resolutions. It would be kickass if more flexibility can be added, such as "at least" and "exact" parameters. For exmaple, users can search wallpapers with dimension of 1920x1200 or higher (with "at least" filter).