Cut-Out Player Faces Megapack
Our Cut-Out Faces Megapack is the biggest collection of Football Manager Player Faces available. All players are available in the default cut-out style. When you download our Cut-Out Faces Megapack, you'll receive over 480,000 player faces to spice up your copy of Football Manager.
- 482,917
- 2025.01 - Released on 04 Dec 2024
Jazzbobification
Swedie
mons
Prompted by Sopel's post (and my reply), I think it's time we had a discussion on the current pack request system. I’d been thinking for a while about ways in which the teampack/mixpack request system can be sorted out as I don’t think it’s functioning well or as intended and I’d like to hear your feedback on this.
I’ve tried to @ all the active frequent contributors to the megapack, both cutters and requesters, so that all opinions are captured. Apologies if I’ve forgotten somebody, no offence intended and you're all encouraged to contribute
It’s fair to say that a lot of requested packs are not dealt with. There are presently 18 pages of teampacks requests pending and 6 pages of mixpack requests. Each page has 30 packs. Each pack has anything between 5-30 images. That’s a rough estimate of over 10,000 images, and probably much more. It’s a pity as there are plenty of good and maybe even necessary sources in there which, let’s be realistic, will never be cut. Also, there’s really no way, other than manually, in which one can (a) check whether a particular image has already been requested, (b) check whether a particular source included in a pack was cut separately later, (c) check for duplicate requests included within packs. Additionally, I would say that a lot of the improvement requests within packs aren’t really necessary, especially in requests made by newer users.
Basically, I think we need to consider changing the process for pack requests, and maybe even removing it outright. I’ve come up with 4 proposals below; all of which have their pros and cons.
*Packs only by staff/mods – this would allow the roundup mixpacks to continue at least
*Packs should only include missing images – I don’t know how this can be enforced
*Packs to have maximum limit of 10-12 sources – smaller sized packs may encourage more take-up
*No packs at all – encourages a more judicious use of the individual request system so that only genuinely needed sources are requested
@bakizp @Baja @Swedie @marrtac @HRiddick @pololuxury @diogoamaral @maxtod77 @rekooner2 @Tatavo @cksrl1000 @delhomme @Lebohang Mokoena @arryst @fumuj @Belajariman @krissmed @ArturM @katalonczyk22 @Rowan @geordie1981 @mvngmnd @StaffMan @ovidiu10 @andr3 @leftfoot @Mustang13297 @tv_capper @jWaSiMhE @Giro @zdendo @Vinceultras42 @Aksull @...KäoS... @ABBFH @andresm_91 @dydwo @tofthefly
Mustang13297
In my opinion, it would be best to have only packs by staff/mods or have a maximum of images per pack.
Sopel
In the current system the request the process goes like this:
Someone makes a request, the request goes uncut, @mons moderates the request after ~a month, does a round-up and creates a mixpack, requester can post another request
What I've been proposing:
Someone makes a request, the "timer" for the request starts, the request goes uncut, ~a month passes, "timer" stops, the request stays on the list, requester can post another request
What it accomplishes is a situation in which the mixpack section is for the teampacks, etc, not a burial ground for many.
The request list gets longer, but is more accessible and it becomes easier to asses what's in there (due to the preview option).
That way cutters can choose what they want to cut, when they want to cut, they decide the quantity of the cuts, the whole process becomes less of a chore.
Think of it this way - someone who wants to do a missing/improvement mixpack wants to take on a pack 20 pictures - various variety, quality, size, etc. That may be off-putting, that may be discouraging.
In this solution, someone who wants to make 20 cut-outs can filter the list, find images that suit them and create the ones that will be the easiest for them and possibly providing the best quality that they can give.
It's basically a choice between working with what you get vs cherry picking what do you want to work with.
Because - from my experience - some very easy cuts just escape me, I wasn't around when they were posted and could easily get them done. But they have been already moderated and I won't take on the whole pack and get them done. Sure, I could just take one picture and when I'm done just leave the comment on the mixpack "X has been cut", that's an option. But that just shows that the nature of mixpacks is flawed - some cuts have been already requested again an cut, the numbers of files are misleading, there may have been better sources since when the pack was uploaded etc.
My solution came with other ideas that would improve the whole request process f.e. a new, duplicate request instead of creating another page could just add the new photo to the original request; duplicate requests from unique requesters would give the request a "bump" or a "like" as a sign of popular demand; a mandatory need for every photo in the teampack to be assigned to a ID from the database, which would allow a control on the contents of the teampack and singular requests.
More can be read in the original discussion, I just wanted to showcase my idea for this in a less rambling manner
Baja
Good thing from those years is that we have most cuts from major leagues,most of them are HQ cuts,no matter 180x180 or 250x250.Even I think this change made a confusion to some people,and they are just making requests because new size.It's unfair to have 15 cuts (improvements for some players) and 0 cuts for some others.Missing images should be priority.
The system with uncut collection works for now,tnx to @mons @krissmed and me as researcher for best possible sources.For example I would avoid re-uploading full mixpacks (for now we are rejecting old and making new active),I would just re-upload them in comment (of the main mixpack) after some of them are done,that's the way to have less mixpacks on filter no matter rejected or active.But that's not some kind of big problem.
About double requests,for example someone made request for some player year ago,and now someone else is making it again but from better source...in that case we\staff often are pointing out to potential cuter where is better source,or we are packing that new source in re-uploaded mixpack.Only staff members should make mixpacks,that's my suggestion,and teampacks should be allowed to all.Maybe that would motivate some requesters to become cuters.It worked to me.
Spliting packs would be a nightmare...especially teampacks.I had a system in my head on old forum to make collections after every 10 pages.Now @mons I don't know what system of collecting you have now,but maybe you should collect them more often,and have less images packs.Just missing packs is simply bad idea,teampacks should have both missing and improvements,and cuter is the guy who should decide is it improvement or not.
At the end cuters are free to do what ever and how many cuts they want.So for example @Sopel,and everybody else you can always pick some teampack\mixpack and do what ever you can,and send\re-upload rest wich you couldn't in comment or send to mons,krissmed,so he can re-upload them again (as we are doing now).
Limiting people on just 3 individual requests was one of the best decisions we ever made.
Only solution is getting more cuters,nothing else.
arryst
I recently have been working with South American teampacks because those are the teams I play with in my game, but for the same reason I honestly don't have much interest in doing, for example, Baja's Eastern European ones since I don't even have those players loaded in my saves.
For that reason I think some sort of organization where cutters take responsability over certain teams, countries or regions would help getting the teampacks done more rapidly; I remember in the old forums there were a couple guys (sorry I can't remember whom exactly) that would show up every month or so to do the uncut mixpacks and that helped avoid requests getting old, buried and forgotten. I know sometimes real life happens and people can't check the site periodically, occasionally I have to go away from the site for a month or more but when I come back I go check for those South American request that might have been added in the meantime.
Also having "better requesters" would help, several times I end up cutting just 10-12 images from teampacks that include 50 requests because most of them already have good cuts, if they take the time to check which players really need a new image it saves us cutters a lot of time plus a smaller teampack always looks more attractive than a huge one. A way to check if a teampack has already been requested would help too.
But at the end of the day having more cutters is the better solution, perhaps Mons should try the "your requests are very good you should try cut them yourself" pep talk with more members of the community, I know it worked for me
Vinceultras42
One can like: @Swedie and other member who works a lot on Sweden, @HRiddick on England. etc .....
Tatavo
tv_capper
It may help to have teampacks listed with their team nationalities searchable too maybe?
I know maxtod77 likes to keep on top of everything Italian, HRiddick with England & arryst with S.America
If cutters are quickly able to source packs they want to cut, that may help cutters find requests and clear through some images.
I also agree that Sopels idea of adding a duplicate request to the original post instead of creating a new page would be great to have, although I'm not sure how easy that would be to implement practically
mvngmnd
EDIT: Or have to list each ID that will be covered when doing the team packs. Either way I think ID's can be better utilised for duplicates, discussion etc.
marrtac
Lebohang Mokoena
Before this new request system, every year I requested the same teampack (Real Oviedo) since... 5 years ago, I think. Never wer made IIRC, but this season I requested every player individually and was completed in less than a month (plus I learned to make er... tolerable cut-outs
What's the solution? I don't think there is one but a mix of various.
- Don't make big request (teampacks / mixpacks should be ~25 pics) because sometimes never get cut
- Allow more requests per user for individual pics (5 indtead of three). Con I see here is when sources aren't good. Pro is more likely than any cutter do an image than a pack.
- Prioritizing. For me, missing is more important than improvement most of the times.
Also mixpacks only for staff/mods sound a good idea.
Edit: My english grammar is awful, hope people understand me.
Swedie
And when we are talking about the request system, a small question for Rob. Would it be possible to include the URL for the source of requests. I see two benefits for this:
1. If it's a good source, it's possible to collect the rest from the same website.
2. A lot of times a bigger version can be obtained by changing the URL, it would be easier to have the url directly rather than having too search for the image first.
andr3
I never tried to see how the new form of requests really worked so I was more ausent.
That also made me look almost exclusive for all portuguese divisions.
But I agree, we just don't have enough cutters for all those requests...
p.s. In this next few days, I'll take a look at the request system.
pokemonxue
Rowan
That's actually not a bad shout, but I imagine it would be a bit of coding work ( @Rob ?) , and it's not that often something is wrong, so posting it on the main thread is just as easy? HERE is the updated image of her which will appear in the next update.
glenn28
mons
Come on man, I've already told you he's been cut here already. Besides, for future reference, this is the request forum I referred to in that post.
glenn28
Dmitri-K
mons
What do you mean? Can you give an example of a similar person you're having an issue with?
weeniehutjr
If there's a team with the same UID as a person, the cutout search page for that person links to the team's one. I don't have an soecfic example but I've noticed it a few times
mons
Ah, I see. I'll check to see if it's possible
Dmitri-K
Is it possible to add a link to player profile here?
mons
It's already one of the ideas under consideration for when the site is eventually renewed
weeniehutjr
Found an example from a recent cutout request - this staff person has the same UID as a team, and View Existing Cuts shows the players on the team instead
hjs
It's showing the face of the searched person.
Dmitri-K
mons
It's not really a top priority to be honest.
Besides, if you have a completed cut to be uploaded, it shouldn't be done as a request, but through this section: