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 Football Manager Facepack, you'll receive over 370,000 player faces to spice up your copy of Football Manager.

  • 377,253
  • 2022.15 - Released on 23 Sep 2022
Cut Out Player Faces Megapack

mons
16 years ago
7 hours ago
69,034
Hi all. I was wondering if it's supposed to be that if I as a staff member upload a response source image that the original request gets the completed status? It would also be nice if we could copy links to upload sources like the old forum👍

I'm not sure I understand you. Do you have an example you could link to?

I've already requested the possibility to upload sources directly from sources like the old forum, yeah?
Mustang13297
7 years ago
1 day ago
21,807
For example here, you can see that there're two pending sources. If you upload a cut as a response to one of them, the other one will still remain pending and that's something that we might wanna avoid in order to keep clean the submission feed.


The second source image was uploaded by me. I saw that the original source was marked as completed, so I reverted it back to pending, but now I understand that was the wrong thing to do.
Mustang13297
7 years ago
1 day ago
21,807
I'm not sure I understand you. Do you have an example you could link to?

I've already requested the possibility to upload sources directly from sources like the old forum, yeah?


See here: https://sortitoutsi.net/graphics/browse/1/223742/timeline
Maybe there needs to be another status for images that are the original request but that are of inferior quality to a better source?
Ernesttico
12 years ago
14 hours ago
4,250
The second source image was uploaded by me. I saw that the original source was marked as completed, so I reverted it back to pending, but now I understand that was the wrong thing to do.


Actually from what I see in the log of the timeline you probably marked the first source as "completed", then you reverted it back. When you want to upload a new source pic, don't bother marking the other(s) as completed. It will be whoever cuts it to decide which image could produce a better cut.

The issue that has to be fixed is that after someone cut one of the images, all the other pending source requests should be marked automatically as completed. 😉
Mustang13297
7 years ago
1 day ago
21,807
Actually from what I see in the log of the timeline you probably marked the first source as "completed", then you reverted it back.


It automatically changed to completed. I just uploaded a response sorce image.
Ernesttico
12 years ago
14 hours ago
4,250
It automatically changed to completed. I just uploaded a response sorce image.


That's where the mistake is!
When you have another source image and you wanna post it, you don't have to use the "Upload response" button or the old source image will be automatically marked as completed. Instead, use the "Upload image" link in the upper and bottom bars in the timeline. 😉
Upload response is only for game ready images!
Side Splitting Pass
13 years ago
10 months ago
29,534
Some interesting comments there (and thanks for the support guys).

My twopence worth for what it's worth:

1) I think there should be a limit on individual requests. Personally I'd make it a 10 requests limit.
2) There should be a separate teampack requests thread (or at least have teampack requests/cut-outs listed separately). Failing that teampack requests need to show as one line only (click to expand request).
3) I wouldn't have mixpack requests, purely to avoid people requesting tons of random images in one pack (I still have nightmares about the guy who requested over 500, mostly bad, images in one pack!).

I'd be more than happy to moderate teampack requests to make sure no one is abusing it.

FAO mons thanks for the offer. I'll upload the pack now and send you a link to it. A few of the pics have been cut today but IMO don't look great (purely because the requested images are too small). However I'll leave it to you to decide which to request.
mons
16 years ago
7 hours ago
69,034
It automatically changed to completed. I just uploaded a response sorce image.

I think that's because you're a mod.

Either way, if when a game ready image is uploaded, all pending source requests are converted to completed, then I think we'll be fine. And if one of the requesters isn't happy, all they'd need to do is either tag one of the mods to re-open or re-cut it, then re-request it themselves.
mons
16 years ago
7 hours ago
69,034
Some interesting comments there (and thanks for the support guys).

My twopence worth for what it's worth:

1) I think there should be a limit on individual requests. Personally I'd make it a 10 requests limit.
Any objections to having a 10 individual request limit?

2) There should be a separate teampack requests thread (or at least have teampack requests/cut-outs listed separately). Failing that teampack requests need to show as one line only (click to expand request).
As long as it's filterable to include either/both depending on personal preference, I don't think the current look needs to be completely eliminated.

3) I wouldn't have mixpack requests, purely to avoid people requesting tons of random images in one pack (I still have nightmares about the guy who requested over 500, mostly bad, images in one pack!).
Rejecting the possibility of mixpacks outright just because someone once did a terrible effort is a bit extreme, I feel. There's a definite benefit to having them imo

I'd be more than happy to moderate teampack requests to make sure no one is abusing it.
Can't think of anybody more suited tbh

FAO mons thanks for the offer. I'll upload the pack now and send you a link to it. A few of the pics have been cut today but IMO don't look great (purely because the requested images are too small). However I'll leave it to you to decide which to request.
Ernesttico
12 years ago
14 hours ago
4,250
Some interesting comments there (and thanks for the support guys).

My twopence worth for what it's worth:

1) I think there should be a limit on individual requests. Personally I'd make it a 10 requests limit.
2) There should be a separate teampack requests thread (or at least have teampack requests/cut-outs listed separately). Failing that teampack requests need to show as one line only (click to expand request).
3) I wouldn't have mixpack requests, purely to avoid people requesting tons of random images in one pack (I still have nightmares about the guy who requested over 500, mostly bad, images in one pack!).

I'd be more than happy to moderate teampack requests to make sure no one is abusing it.

FAO mons thanks for the offer. I'll upload the pack now and send you a link to it. A few of the pics have been cut today but IMO don't look great (purely because the requested images are too small). However I'll leave it to you to decide which to request.


It seems today we had quite a lot of ideas and improvements in this thread. Good! 🙂

1) I agree that we need to set a limit for individual requests. In the old forum we had a total of 6 individual requests per user (considering the sum of missing and improvement requests). We might think to raise it and bring the total to 10, why not.
2) I strongly agree on this point. As I said in one of my recent post it'd be better to have two separate feeds or sections for individual and pack requests so that the users can switch between the two and they don't interfere with each other.
These requests have always been processed at two different rates: a quicker pace for individual and a slower one for packs in general. This way, we could set different limits: 6 or 10 for single requests and maybe no limits for the packs (as it was before).
The packs feed/section shouldn't be like the current submission feed with all the individual faces visible, but more like a list of every single pack, or it won't be useful and well organized. As SSP proposed we might think to add an "expand request" button/arrow to show all the images contained in them. Plus in this feed/section we should have a bar to filter "Pending", "completed" and "rejected" packs. Once this feed is up and running and we don't risk to create any "flooding" in the individual requests feed, I could help and check all the old packs and point out to mons and/or SSP the ones that are still pending, in order to change their status from "completed" to "pending".
3) I don't have an opinion one way or the other about mixpacks, but if there's one person moderating the pack section, we could easily leave the chance to create them.

4) I'm the short end of the stick in here so my opinion in this matter can be disregarded, but if I have to think to someone to serve as moderator of the pack section, there's only one candidate in my mind: SSP. 🙂
Footygamer
16 years ago
7 hours ago
24,499
That was alot to get through!

I've now disabled the 20 image request limit for packs.

Some more suggestions on top of the ones I suggested in the last page:

1) A page listing users who've requested, how many they have requested and date of first request and most recent request e.g.

Tom - 2 Requests - Oldest 1st May 2020 - Newest 12th November 2020
Dick - 14 Requests - Oldest 25th December 2019 - Newest 4th May 2020

etc. With maybe some filters to find people who've been waiting for a while. This helps solve the whole "X uploads 2 then Y uploads 50" issue.

2) Browsing like the backgrounds and data update. This already exists here but is not linked to because it's optimised for the backgrounds and needs fixing for the cut outs.

The idea is it would look something like this:

- England 54 Pending (70% of players complete)
-- Premier League 12 Pending (95% of players complete)
-- Championship 14 Pending (87% of players complete)
---- Watford 2 Pending (99% of players complete)
---- Luton 0 Pending (50% of players complete)

So you can browse every nation/league/team and see counts for how many pending and how many completed images images their are for each.

This would give a different way to get an overview of how complete the megapack is and maybe rather than looking for a pack or an individual submission or something you might say "i'm going to finish Turkey". That's not to say everyone should work that way, but it's another different option that people might enjoy.
Ernesttico
12 years ago
14 hours ago
4,250
That was alot to get through!

I've now disabled the 20 image request limit for packs.

Some more suggestions on top of the ones I suggested in the last page:

1) A page listing users who've requested, how many they have requested and date of first request and most recent request e.g.

Tom - 2 Requests - Oldest 1st May 2020 - Newest 12th November 2020
Dick - 14 Requests - Oldest 25th December 2019 - Newest 4th May 2020

etc. With maybe some filters to find people who've been waiting for a while. This helps solve the whole "X uploads 2 then Y uploads 50" issue.

2) Browsing like the backgrounds and data update. This already exists here but is not linked to because it's optimised for the backgrounds and needs fixing for the cut outs.

The idea is it would look something like this:

- England 54 Pending (70% of players complete)
-- Premier League 12 Pending (95% of players complete)
-- Championship 14 Pending (87% of players complete)
---- Watford 2 Pending (99% of players complete)
---- Luton 0 Pending (50% of players complete)

So you can browse every nation/league/team and see counts for how many pending and how many completed images images their are for each.

This would give a different way to get an overview of how complete the megapack is and maybe rather than looking for a pack or an individual submission or something you might say "i'm going to finish Turkey". That's not to say everyone should work that way, but it's another different option that people might enjoy.


Thanks for the reply, @Footygamer.
Which of the proposals we made in the last posts do you think you'll implement?
I feel your two suggestions might be ok (I don't have a precise opinion right now) but should be considered quality of life improvements that might be added at a later stage.
Now that packs have not limits of images uploadable anymore, I feel the main focus should be giving two different feeds/sections to individual requests and pack requests. Yesterday a user uploaded two mixpacks of 50 images each (all good sources that will definitely fill some gaps and update our current cuts), but as it is now, all those pics went in the usual feed where individual requests are. Imagine if only two other users would have done the same, now that's nothing preventing our feed to get "flooded" by requests...
Right now we have 10 pages of pending sources only and this number is only gonna increase if we keep the system the way it is.
What we'd need is:

- Creation of two feeds/sections, mutually exclusive, that will display ONLY the pics of their category: one with only individual requests images visible and another one with only pack requests images visible.
- For the pack feed/section I'd use a different system: not all the single images displayed in a long list like for individual requests (it'd be unmanageable in that case), but a list of the titles of the packs, showed each in a single line, with an option to click and expand the request, so that you can see all the images inside (maybe via a button).
- Add a filter option (pending, completed, rejected) to the packs feed/section.
- When you click on a pack submission, the names of the players/staff are not showed. Can you make them visible (maybe adding their IDs too)?
- Set a limit of 10 requests for individual requests (obviously only once all the other changes will be active.
Maybe, at a later stage, we could review this number and decrease it a bit if we feel we're getting way too requests compared to the work of active cutters.

Can you please tell me if you're gonna take in consideration and start working on any of these ideas, Footy? I don't wanna to push you, but if we're not gonna make these changes in a reasonable time, I fear the current unique list is gonna be filled with thousands of pending requests, becoming a mess for cutters and users.

Have a good day, everyone!
Lebohang Mokoena
16 years ago
12 hours ago
5,654
I didn't visited the web in a few says and now I'm don't undestand it. Just kidding. It looks great and it have great new features but it seems a bit confused. I need to inspect it a bit.
Footygamer
16 years ago
7 hours ago
24,499
Thanks for the reply, @Footygamer.
Which of the proposals we made in the last posts do you think you'll implement?

I'm afraid I don't know how to respond to this question. I'm not sure there were concrete proposals? Can you spell them out more clearly there's alot to try and read back through and make sense of.
- Creation of two feeds/sections, mutually exclusive, that will display ONLY the pics of their category: one with only individual requests images visible and another one with only pack requests images visible.

I've added an "In Pack" filter. For some reason it can be a little slow to load if you don't also pick a status. I haven't figured that one out yet, but it should do what you want
- For the pack feed/section I'd use a different system: not all the single images displayed in a long list like for individual requests (it'd be unmanageable in that case), but a list of the titles of the packs, showed each in a single line, with an option to click and expand the request, so that you can see all the images inside (maybe via a button).

This already exists??? Just click View Packs
- Add a filter option (pending, completed, rejected) to the packs feed/section.

On the list I think
- When you click on a pack submission, the names of the players/staff are not showed. Can you make them visible (maybe adding their IDs too)?

That was a bug, it's fixed.
Footygamer
16 years ago
7 hours ago
24,499
You can now also copy and paste IDs

https://i.imgur.com/RgIuKtC.png
Ernesttico
12 years ago
14 hours ago
4,250
That was a bug, it's fixed.


@Footygamer
Now that you fixed that bug, all the names of players/staff, when you search for somebody, have disappeared. The little iconface beside the name (when a player already has a cut-out) is gone too. I don't know if it's related to your previous change.

https://i.imgur.com/aBSyjv6.jpg

https://i.imgur.com/sjwsF5O.jpg
Parker26
8 years ago
1 day ago
8,364
Premium
Hi, I am really enjoying the new website, it is a massive improvement on the last one in my opinion, once you get used to the change.

It was mentioned above, however the names of the players in requests is still not showing up for me? I see you are aware of it and have said it is fixed so it might be a problem on my end.

Edit:
Ernesttico beat me to it lol
mons
16 years ago
7 hours ago
69,034
Is it just me or don't player names now appear to the right of each image in the section on the right? Same goes for the number of images on the timelines and number of comments 😕

I could swear they were there earlier today.

https://i.imgur.com/rJgud69.png

Edit: Beaten to it 😀



Love the new additions, especially the UID being more easily visible and copyable. If I may, the addition of a select all as complete button in packs would be a definite aid in terms of moderation - clicking it once instead of once for each individual cut in a pack would be a great timesaver.

As for @Footygamer's suggestions yesterday, I'm a big fan of both, though I'm sure we all agree these are far from an immediate priority and can be added at a later, less stressful, time.


This already exists??? Just click View Packs

I think what Ernesttico was suggesting (and whether this is achievable from a technical standpoint from your end is another story) is that pack requests get listed by default as a single entry in the submissions home page, however with the possibility of clicking a + button (for instance) which then expands all its content in a viewable list within the same page). Some kind of minimisable/expandable thread akin to what reddit used to look like.

For the time being, however, the new in pack filter can distinguish between packs and individual requests very nicely, I have to say.

One minor thing to maybe help avoid confusion for new users. 'In pack' may be construed as meaning 'in the megapack', so perhaps it could be renamed to 'For cutters - image category' or something similar, with the items in the drop-down list being 'Included in a request pack' and 'Not Included in a request pack'.



I didn't visited the web in a few says and now I'm don't undestand it. Just kidding. It looks great and it have great new features but it seems a bit confused. I need to inspect it a bit.

Have a look at the first post for an initial explanation of the various filters. Then it's just a case of navigating and finding your way 🙂
Ernesttico
12 years ago
14 hours ago
4,250
I think what Ernesttico was suggesting (and whether this is achievable from a technical standpoint from your end is another story) is that pack requests get listed by default as a single entry in the submissions home page, however with the possibility of clicking a + button (for instance) which then expands all its content in a viewable list within the same page). Some kind of minimisable/expandable thread akin to what reddit used to look like.


@mons Thanks for explaining better than me all the key points of my previous post! 🙂
Baja
12 years ago
16 minutes ago
23,733
One more major blow wich I've noticed right now...
After moving to the new site,teampack requests are completaly messed up.If you've had some FM21 players (new UIDs) in you're packs all of them are lost/gone/excluded from your teampack requests.
mons
16 years ago
7 hours ago
69,034
One more major blow wich I've noticed right now...
After moving to the new site,teampack requests are completaly messed up.If you've had some FM21 players (new UIDs) in you're packs all of them are lost/gone/excluded from your teampack requests.

Can you give us an example?
Baja
12 years ago
16 minutes ago
23,733
Can you give us an example?

I went to my teampacks of Radnicki Sremska Mitrovica,Indjija,Loznica and all images with UIDs added for FM21 are not included.
Here are collections for Radnicki Sremska Mitrovica and Loznica originally requested on old forum.
https://i.imgur.com/uG2SyvJ.jpghttps://i.imgur.com/In7OSez.jpg

And here are those requests.
https://sortitoutsi.net/graphics/submissions/collection/4390

https://sortitoutsi.net/graphics/submissions/collection/4383

No those 20000... requested images,not even after full pack download.
mons
16 years ago
7 hours ago
69,034
I went to my teampacks of Radnicki Sremska Mitrovica,Indjija,Loznica and all images with UIDs added for FM21 are not included.
Here are collections for Radnicki Sremska Mitrovica and Loznica originally requested on old forum.
https://i.imgur.com/uG2SyvJ.jpghttps://i.imgur.com/In7OSez.jpg

And here are those requests.
https://sortitoutsi.net/graphics/submissions/collection/4390

https://sortitoutsi.net/graphics/submissions/collection/4383

No those 20000... requested images,not even after full pack download.

Oh I see. Pity 😢 Added it to the issues thread 👍
Footygamer
16 years ago
7 hours ago
24,499
How did you add images for FM21 UIDs before the FM21 beta was out?
mons
16 years ago
7 hours ago
69,034
How did you add images for FM21 UIDs before the FM21 beta was out?

Because ... and got them through that, I suspect.

I hate to pester you, but it would be great if we could have player names back for each request in the submission form...
Footygamer
16 years ago
7 hours ago
24,499
Yeah I don't think we can support that unfortunately. I assume it's a grey area that goes unnoticed, but going forward we can't be facilitating researchers breaking their NDAs by using data of the game thats not been released yet.

I can import the ones that have gone missing in the conversion to the new site, but next year any new game prep from people with early access will have to happen away from the site and only uploaded once the BETA is out.

Hope you understand.

And fixed the names, sorry I didn't realise I had broken that!
mons
16 years ago
7 hours ago
69,034
And fixed the names, sorry I didn't realise I had broken that!

Lovely stuff, thanks!

Just so you're aware, manually tagging people by typing @mons isn't working yet, so it might be wise to remove it from the blurb above posts in case it gives the wrong impression...
Ernesttico
12 years ago
14 hours ago
4,250
Yeah I don't think we can support that unfortunately. I assume it's a grey area that goes unnoticed, but going forward we can't be facilitating researchers breaking their NDAs by using data of the game thats not been released yet.

I can import the ones that have gone missing in the conversion to the new site, but next year any new game prep from people with early access will have to happen away from the site and only uploaded once the BETA is out.

Hope you understand.

And fixed the names, sorry I didn't realise I had broken that!


Thanks for fixing the names bug, Footy!
Baja
12 years ago
16 minutes ago
23,733
Yeah I don't think we can support that unfortunately. I assume it's a grey area that goes unnoticed, but going forward we can't be facilitating researchers breaking their NDAs by using data of the game thats not been released yet.

I can import the ones that have gone missing in the conversion to the new site, but next year any new game prep from people with early access will have to happen away from the site and only uploaded once the BETA is out.

Hope you understand.


No worries mate about that.I've been asked mons what to do with those,since we wasn't even sure that those UIDs will stay,but after seeing some other researchers posting them as requests,I've decided to do the same.Ofc I don't want and didn't want to cause any issues with that.

Have a small question? What happend with 180x180 cuts? As you know there's some number of images wich are simply way too small for 250x,and as that they look very poor,but some of them might look solid as 180x.Also we already have a large number of 180x cuts in MP so that size cuts shouldn't be an issue.

Also,I would like to ask,what FM db is connected with our db,since in the past there was few wrong names in official SI db,wich are corrected in meanwhile.Still I can't search for them,in our db,by new/corrected names.
julkjulk
2 years ago
2 hours ago
17,319
could the club job appears?

You'll need to Login to comment