drewalt
 member, 56 posts
Fri 27 Jan 2017
at 14:57
Re: Proposal: External Portrait Images
If I may, and I mean no offense by this I genuinely do not grasp the reasoning here.  Clearly there's something I don't understand here that is obvious to others and I am just trying to suss it out; it helps me follow better when I internalize the concept.

quote:
No, but it just has the potential to make the damage more widespread if misused, and lessens the ability of GMs to help police inappropriate images.


In what way?  I just tested this in a game and it appears I am able to change or remove portraits, remove player's ability to post, delete posts, hide posts and threads, etc.  I don't see what a player can do that's going with an avatar image to be a problem, the controls are so comprehensive and well thought out.  All of the reporting mechanisms were also available to me in case I had something I needed to report.

quote:
Anyone who wants to use an externally hosted image in their posts currently already has the ability. With the use of the in game scratchpad to hold the code, the effort required, should someone want to do it, is, IMO, pretty minimal.


True, but that was kind of my point.  What's the functional difference between putting it on one field versus the other?  This is where I don't understand why it's okay on the right side of the screen but not in the margin on the left.

quote:
Most of the sites that do allow people to use any image for an avatar allow one avatar .... that is used for every game the user is in, and using code to import their 'character' pic in any post they want it in is the norm.  Of the sites I've used, only 2 give the user the ability to use multiple pics simultaneously, and the other site is set up pretty much like RPoL in that regard.


Okay this I sort of follow, but I have used sites where you can post as multiple users with separate names, avatars and signatures on the same account as well, so I still don't follow.

If I understand html correctly, and I may not because my ability to use it is both A) self taught and B) extremely limited, here's how I understand how the portrait function basically works.

The code of the site, where the avatar is supposed to be, has a tag there <img> or whatever, that points to the image's URL.  Basically when you pick a portrait from the gallery, all that's really happening is the little piece of code is changing, but when the browser executes the code it knows that little tag means "Show a picture which is stored here".

It's basically like a drop down select menu or "pick field" in an Access form or Excel cell, essentially.  Basically, if I change one of the options in the pick list, it appears as an option in the field.

Would it not be possible instead to save a text string of whatever URL as a variable, and simply let one of the drop down options be that variable field?

Or is that like some kind of coding kerfuffle where it just doesn't work like that?
bigbadron
 moderator, 15263 posts
 He's big, he's bad,
 but mostly he's Ron.
Fri 27 Jan 2017
at 15:13
Re: Proposal: External Portrait Images
Basically, portraits are more numerous in any game than other images are, and it's far easier to prevent issues with inappropriate or copyrighted portraits by vetting them before they are added to our library, than it is for us to go through every game and check for them.

Then check again a few days later to make sure the user has not replaced an image with an inappropriate one.
Utsukushi
 member, 1401 posts
 I should really stay out
 of this, I know...but...
Fri 27 Jan 2017
at 16:22
Re: Proposal: External Portrait Images
quote:
This is where I don't understand why it's okay on the right side of the screen but not in the margin on the left.

Also, speaking as a user, I have to say there's more of an "official" appearance to the things in that margin -- they're offered by RPoL and presumably supported by it.  Something that somebody posts into their message, or into their Description field, is quite clearly their own doing and not something that I assume has the Official Shannara Stamp Of Approval.  (I do believe BBR also received a Stamp of Approval during his Moderating Ceremony, but his is behind the couch, covered in cobwebs.)

So it would actually have to be carefully watched, and that's adding a whole new field of moderation.  Which tags to two other points: 1) Our beautiful and talented Portrait Mistress recently retired -- I don't honestly know why and it's none of my business, but I assume it was something to do with having a life.  So despite the Mod's regular protests that they don't mind at all when we ask them for things like removing us from a game the GM has dropped out of, their time is finite and that would take up a significant amount more of it.  And 2) We already get, a few times a year it seems like, someone complaining about the `heavy-handed' moderation on RPoL, what with their politely worded reminders about forum rules and TOU, and Cruinne just generally looking good in leather boots.  I don't see this helping there, either, because of course, nobody notices all the times the Mods don't have to step in.  We don't even notice the times they think, "Mmm, that's kind of on the edge, but I think it's OK."  We just notice the times they do something, and then we get upset.

ALSO speaking as a user -- while opening up Portraits to potentially "anything" does have its advantages and I don't disagree with the OP's points that the Gallery officially closing does make this more pertinent -- I have yet to be unable to find something I like.  And where I've seen people be unable to find something quite right, the combination of an official Portrait that's `close enough', with the `right' picture in their Description, works awfully well.  And honestly, I like the convenience of not having to search the entire Internet looking for exactly the right thing.  I spend enough time looking through the portrait gallery.

Which brings to mind the question of reliability.  There's something of a promise with RPoL's portraits.  They're stored by RPoL, so while they occasionally lose contact for a few days, they come back.  If people start linking to random images on the internet, a lot more games are going to end up with broken link images in place of character images.  And knowing that there are some people who can't stand having a drawn image in the same game as a photograph image, I'm pretty sure that wouldn't go over well, either.
drewalt
 member, 57 posts
Fri 27 Jan 2017
at 16:27
Re: Proposal: External Portrait Images
In reply to bigbadron (msg # 9):

Thank you bigbadron, I think I understand the thinking now; what if there was a problem and someone posted a lot before you could stop it, could you possibly go back and delete all the offending content, etc.  That clears things up.

I would respectfully like to suggest a risk that isn't significant is being perceived as significant (worst case scenario you have to lock down and hide threads or delete them) and that the cost of this control seems to exceed the benefit.

Furthermore, using Shannara's method, since we're equating that with portrait selection, a rogue user could do just as much damage.  So I still don't see how this method helps alleviate anything to begin with.

I'm still puzzled by this line of thinking and I believe it merits criticism, however it clarifies for me this issue is a difference in perceived risk so my questions are answered.  I know you guys don't hear it enough so thank you all for moderating the site and being forthcoming with responses.
Evil Empryss
 member, 1523 posts
 Try tasting your words
 before spitting them out
Fri 27 Jan 2017
at 17:06
Re: Proposal: External Portrait Images
drewalt:
I would respectfully like to suggest a risk that isn't significant is being perceived as significant ... that the cost of this control seems to exceed the benefit.

Any risk that is unnecessary is too much risk.

Not only is the current gallery huge, with something for just about everyone neatly arranged (and with more key words improving the search function daily), but the ability to submit new pics will eventually return, eliminating the need for users to do it themselves.
Shannara
 moderator, 3707 posts
 Keep calm, drink more
 COFFEE!!!!
Fri 27 Jan 2017
at 18:06
Re: Proposal: External Portrait Images
Well, it's been my experience that pretty much all websites equate linking a lesser risk when it comes to damages, than incorporating the import of images into their code, so we are not alone.

Let me reverse the question on you.

Why is it too much trouble for you (and anyone else who wants to use their own picture) to use the available resources to import the picture yourself, especially as the code for doing so can be saved to copy/paste quite easily?
drewalt
 member, 58 posts
Fri 27 Jan 2017
at 18:37
Re: Proposal: External Portrait Images
Evil Empryss:
Any risk that is unnecessary is too much risk.


Risk is inherent in all activities.  It can only be managed not prevented, and any effort to manage risk must cost less than the effects of what the management prevents.

Shannara:
Why is it too much trouble for you (and anyone else who wants to use their own picture) to use the available resources to import the picture yourself, especially as the code for doing so can be saved to copy/paste quite easily?


Fair enough, let me break this out into a few prongs:

1. I'm currently running a game where the players will encounter many new and strange monsters over time.  There's nothing really representative of them in the portrait gallery at all, though I generally fudge it with a skull or skeleton or something just to signal "hey bad guy!".

If I have 20 different kinds of these monsters, am I have twenty different lines of text in my scratchpad where I must remember that line #17 is a Pizza Golem?

2. I post on mobile devices fairly often, where copy/paste operations like this are extremely tedious.

3.  Someone went through a lot of trouble to create an aesthetically pleasing layout for your avatar's position on the site layout.  I just would like to avail myself of that pre-existing resource.  Nothing I can do with code (being an amateur) looks half so professional or visually balanced as the wonderful presentation the site provides.
Shannara
 moderator, 3708 posts
 Keep calm, drink more
 COFFEE!!!!
Fri 27 Jan 2017
at 19:31
Re: Proposal: External Portrait Images
Pizza Golem  -  (Line 17 Code here)

There's one problem solved.

-------------

Mobile devices -- not a good argument, really, as most things on this site, including typing out a story, is more tedious than if you were using a computer and keyboard.  It's a fact of the medium.

As noted by Evil Empryss, the ability to submit portraits that you want to the gallery sort of takes care of the aesthetics argument as well.

-------------

There are a lot of valid arguments about a lot of things that could be put forth, and I'm sure that a lot of people would benefit from changes in the rules.  Why don't we allow adult content for just anyone?  Why don't we allow duplicate accounts?  Why don't we allow discussion of religion and politics in the public forums?  Why do we limit certain content from the site, even though the risk is small if we allowed it?

jase, and the moderators, as well as the users who've been involved in the discussions over the years, have put a lot of thought into the site's rules and design.  (Me not so much the design, as I was fine with things the way they were when I first got here.)  Risks may be small to any of them, relatively, but none of them were put in place without considering the ramifications and the benefits.

I did the portrait editing for 10+ years.  I threw a couple of little hissy fits over those years on being sent pornographic submissions (and thanks to the one person who at least sent me nude pics of guys instead of gals, though I could have done without those too) after one of those rants where I was tired of opening up emails and finding boobs staring me in the face.  Back when RPoL first restricted adult content, a friend of mine set up her own website for her games, and despite her only rule about pics being no nudity in the pics people used, I don't believe it even took a week before someone had uploaded a porn-style avatar.

I think a lot of people are quite happy that we do have some control over what is used for the majority of the pics.  Yes, there are ways to get around that, and some people do, as all the moderators have spent time removing inappropriate pics from character descriptions and asking the GM to better monitor those descriptions, and asking the person who posted the pics to please not do so in a public area again.  Most users, I daresay, aren't even aware of these things because they're handled quietly and without much fuss.

I've also been sent submissions that took 5 minutes to download despite the fact that I have very good high speed internet.  I don't even want to think how badly that could mess up the aesthetics if someone used their own externally hosted image that's not the correct size and/or is a huge-sized file -- both from skewing and the inconvenience of a high bandwidth load on mobile devices, dial up connections, and slower computers.

Now, I'll just bow out of the discussion, as if none of this weighs greater to those reading than the fact that they'd like it the other way, I'm not likely to change any minds. :-)

I am just one voice after all ... and jase, ultimately, is the one who will make the decision.
drewalt
 member, 59 posts
Fri 27 Jan 2017
at 20:00
Re: Proposal: External Portrait Images
1. Doesn't change the fact I now have to create an index, making the task even more tedious.
2. I sincerely disagree that the hardware of the user is not a consideration.  I assume if I tried to access the site on an acoustic coupler modem, I'd have little success yes?  Likely the site is built considering what hardware I am most likely to have.  And no, I don't expect a labor of love like this to accommodate everything, just pointing out I am trying to use the existing functionality intelligently.
3. Submissions are closed.

For what it's worth Shannara I really do appreciate your efforts and I hope nothing I said was perceived as an affront.  That's a lot of work, and I will accept my understatement of the year trophy now.

Nor do I think the site's rules are arbitrary or unfair.  I am rather sorry if I've upset anyone, it's just I genuinely don't agree with the reasoning here.  But I don't have to agree with the reasoning, I just have to follow the rules.  No one owes me an explanation or justification.  I can throw out my own line of reasoning and hope I'm persuasive however.  Clearly I have not sufficiently explained things well enough and that's on me, and this will neither be the first or last time I fail in such pursuit.

I have clearly been heard, and that just tickles me pink.   It speaks volumes of the character of the moderation and user base we can have this discussion.  That's all anyone can ask for.
Grimmond
 member, 440 posts
 Antler-care by LIV THATCH
 "RALPH" The Wonder Llama
Fri 27 Jan 2017
at 20:08
Re: Proposal: External Portrait Images
I drive a Dodge Magnum, it's a sharp car with lots of power and it suits my life style and needs. I play on line games at RPoL, it works well and suits all my needs for the most part.

Are there things I would like, or things that don't work so well with both ? Yes. But I choose to drive that car and play here because BOTH suit me well enough.

I volunteer here as well to try to make the site better. Alas Dodge has yet to take me up on the offer.  :)
Shannara
 moderator, 3709 posts
 Keep calm, drink more
 COFFEE!!!!
Fri 27 Jan 2017
at 20:42
Re: Proposal: External Portrait Images
No affront was perceived, drewalt. Nor do I mean my comments as a criticism against either making suggestions, or standing up for one's own opinion in a polite manner, as you have done.  :-)
bigbadron
 moderator, 15264 posts
 He's big, he's bad,
 but mostly he's Ron.
Fri 27 Jan 2017
at 20:46
Re: Proposal: External Portrait Images
quote:
3. Submissions are closed.

Not quite.  Submissions are temporarily closed, and will be reopened as soon as the new portrait editors feel they have a handle on the job (I believe this has already been mentioned above).

quote:
I would respectfully like to suggest a risk that isn't significant is being perceived as significant (worst case scenario you have to lock down and hide threads or delete them) and that the cost of this control seems to exceed the benefit.

Since the portraits sit in the left hand "official" column of a page (as Utsukushi pointed out), there could be a perception that we are responsible for them, unlike anything in the body of a post, which is clearly the responsibility of the post's author.

So worst case scenario is that the site gets sued for breach of copyright on the portraits, or closed down for exposing minors to portraits with Adult content.

Certainly the cost of actually showing in court that the site was not responsible for those portraits would be far higher than the cost of vetting the portraits and hosting them.
drewalt
 member, 61 posts
Fri 27 Jan 2017
at 20:57
Re: Proposal: External Portrait Images
Well, for what it's worth, I think I can answer how you would monitor this effectively without killing the poor moderators.

An audit stands up in court in suits involving millions of dollars and audits are done with a 95% confidence interval.  I would audit the games for violations and that would be pretty strong evidence of due diligence.

The sample size to get a 95% confidence interval even in a very large population is usually actually a pretty small number, and analytics could be used to narrow down the population a great deal (for example rule out all games not updated in over 3 years perhaps just to make something up).  I'd put the results somewhere public just to prove the procedure was done.

Since I imagine the moderators are spot checking anyway, why not just make it statistically driven (granted I would probably stratify the sample between Adult Mature and regular games and add a judgmental sample, I am sure your expertise can guide you to higher risk games) and have your evidence ready to go in case the site ever had to be defended.
bigbadron
 moderator, 15265 posts
 He's big, he's bad,
 but mostly he's Ron.
Fri 27 Jan 2017
at 21:12
Re: Proposal: External Portrait Images
Or we could just stick with the system that we know has worked for over ten years, and costs the site $0.00.
Grimmond
 member, 442 posts
 Antler-care by LIV THATCH
 "RALPH" The Wonder Llama
Fri 27 Jan 2017
at 22:31
Re: Proposal: External Portrait Images
So my thoughts ... running the gallery in the manner it is run currently, costs us nothing. We have volunteers updating the gallery. My understanding is this system is close to being back on line. They head off the need to revamp the system, and or do additional programming building a new system or revamping the old system, thus allowing Jace to continue his efforts else ware. With this system we don't have to "wonder" if we will be sued, as there is nothing to sue us over.
drewalt
 member, 62 posts
Fri 27 Jan 2017
at 23:21
Re: Proposal: External Portrait Images
Well my suggestion is also free, to be clear.

A PhD. statistician once told me while I was in his training course "I spend my career showing people how to use simple math anybody can do to get new processes which produce better results in less time, and my spare time drinking because your managers who paid for this training never let you use it."  XD
Sir Swindle
 member, 137 posts
Sat 28 Jan 2017
at 04:24
Re: Proposal: External Portrait Images
Not that it would ever go to court they would just send you one of those letters to take it down. Except they wouldn't because all of the content is behind whitelist walls...
bigbadron
 moderator, 15266 posts
 He's big, he's bad,
 but mostly he's Ron.
Sat 28 Jan 2017
at 05:42
Re: Proposal: External Portrait Images
In reply to Sir Swindle (msg # 24):

It depends what country they're in, and how rabid their lawyers are.  We'd rather not take the risk.

The current system allows us to largely deal with the risks before they become an issue (rather than removing portraits that people are already using).

This message was last edited by the user at 06:51, Sat 28 Jan.

ppwhere
 member, 11 posts
Sat 28 Jan 2017
at 16:53
Re: Proposal: External Portrait Images
If it is about getting sued (by people who has every rights to do it) it is always better not to risk. It is not just about copyrights but indecent images to minors and all. Rpol could get a serious problem for no gain whatsoever.
BTW even if the problems above wouldn't exist I could find a lot more useful things to add to this site (of which none would cause problems...)

This message was last edited by the user at 16:54, Sat 28 Jan.

gowkaiser96
 member, 10 posts
 Penetrate Section Z
 Destroy L Brain
Sat 28 Jan 2017
at 20:17
Re: Proposal: External Portrait Images
The main issue is the effort to implement, plus effort to watch regularly, AND not having as much ability to turn off the tap without player backlash even if they honestly and legitimately can't deal with it at the time.

It's a "We run this site people would break down in tears over if it shut down, as a HOBBY" issue.

So when even the method they prefer is something with so many in jokes about it's status.  Throwing on extra coding to set up, and needing to deal with additional personal oversight.  One they can't declare hiatus on when needed without a much larger impact and backlash just isn't a very appealing option for the ones who need to run it, rather than use it.

As "We've turned off filtered image submissions to our private gallery" is much easier to close when needed without real complaint, than "We've had to disabled custom avatars."

So it just isn't worth it for the staff for these reasons as much as anything. For good reason, unfortunately for those who want the feature to be added to this site many of us are starting to feel old realizing we've been posting here nearly 10 years.

You can bring up the amounts of effort to implement, or how low the internet lawyering risks are all you want.  It won't change the effort overhead of "One and done image check.  Opening hours are 'when we honestly have the time'" Vs "Add new site infrastructure, AND we can't deal with it on our own time once it's running."

I admit I don't use the avatar function here really, even if a good pal of mine has been more prone to submit stuff to it in the past. Even if I could upload my own image I probably would still let that feature collect dust even though I know many people would adore it.

Main reason I'd personally want custom avatars in some far of fantasy day, is due to how many promising games die over "Hey let's make our own forum/use other forum so we can use custom avatars!" and then promptly implode as soon as they set up on some random whatever board instead of RPOL.  Because they wanted custom pictures more than they wanted to use the site actually built around practical PbP gaming.

(Guys, no. Keep using the good site that works good-welp)

TL;DR: You can talk about how small the coding effort is, and how low the internet lawyer risks are and "But statistics show-" as much as you want.

The real hurdle, is is their free time available to put towards the site.

As well as the fact you can't turn custom avatars on and off without causing waves compared to disabling gallery image submissions.  Even based on a legitimate lack of time to always be on call to deal with it.

So even if we did get custom avatars, there would be a lot more screaming for them to deal with when they have to turn them off, regardless of the fact I bet all of us posting about this subject would probably be more well behaved about it.

Though I admit I prefer "RPOL is still a thing up and running I'm able to use" to "But what about custom avatars?"

EDIT: Editing binge clean up based on "Those extra well meaning but rambling paragraphs seemed like a good idea at the time on 3 hours of sleep"

This message was last edited by the user at 22:01, Sat 28 Jan.

jase
 admin, 3522 posts
 Cogito, ergo procuro.
 Carpe stultus!
Sun 29 Jan 2017
at 13:47
Re: Proposal: External Portrait Images
Though copyright/legal issues are not something that should be ignored, it's not really the reason why things are.

From my perspective there's several key reasons for the status quo.  In order of importance;

  1. Continuity - Big red Xs ahoy!  Image hosts change policies or paths to images, bandwidth quotas are exceeded, hotlinking is disabled, users move/rename/delete images, users close their accounts or they're closed for them after inactivity.  All of these things cause images to fail to load, severely hampering the flow of the thread plus looking plain bad and unprofessional.

    The transient nature of characters (e.g. they can be deleted) means we have to save the portrait information in each and every message, if a character has 1,000 posts under their name and the image stops loading then there's 1,000 messages with a bad image.  This is magnitudes worse than a broken image that's been inserted into a message.  It's also easy to fix/remove a broken image in a message; the GM or poster edits it.  I'm not sure many GMs realise how you can even get the portrait to change (a simple edit won't do it for reasons I won't go into here); you edit the message, change the post to be under another character, and then edit it again and change the character back.  It's impossible for a player to fix it (unless they've got more than one character, in which case they can do what the GM does, possibly temporarily revealing more than they want to).

  2. Control - As suggested earlier, the fact that portraits are part of the left-hand column does make it seem official (rather than the right side which clearly has user created content).  When I was considering implementing portraits I quickly came to the conclusion that if we were going to officially support portraits then I wanted to make sure what was there would be something we'd be proud of.

  3. Community #1 - Portrait you want not there?  Great, help build our awesome image gallery so that all members can benefit, not just you!  If it's in the gallery it's there for all to see and use, not just you (someone could theoretically re-use an image located elsewhere, but they'd have to find it first (basically they'd have to play in the same game as you, so you're talking about an audience of a few people vs thousands)).

  4. Quality - Hosting the images ourselves we can make sure that all the images fall within our guidelines and are as consistent as possible.  This means content, image quality, image size, no watermarks or names etc.  We've got a list.

  5. Appropriateness -  We can ensure that not only are the images good, but they're also not really really bad.

  6. Weirdness - Sorry I didn't have a better summary.  Sometimes odd things can happen, like "why does this portrait take ages to load?" (well it's a massive 100mb high quality image which has had it's physical dimensions set to 100x100 pixels to fit in our site) or "why do I get redirected elsewhere when loading this thread?" (well the image host has changed the location of the image and put in a redirect, so you get redirected to the new image location and it takes you away from RPoL).

  7. Community #2 -  Most of the users aren't like the enthusiastic people who post here.  They're the quiet majority who possibly can't (or don't want) to go to the trouble of trying to find an image, edit it, upload it somewhere, figure out how to link to it and then finally update their character portrait.  Far far easier to find an image, click and done.

  8. Copyright/Legal - Though we've voluntarily taken on more responsibility, it's extremely easy for us to remove an image.  Though we hate to remove portraits (and replace it with something else to avoid a gap), it can be done in a matter of seconds.

    I get removal requests from time to time when an artist stumbles upon something on here they haven't given permission for.  If it's an image in a character description (which is most of the time) then it's a piece of cake to remove.  If it's in the portrait gallery it's also simple.  Heaven forbid it was a portrait image a user had used dozens or hundreds of times!  Sorry, not volunteering myself for that editing duty!


I realise being able to do what you want when you want makes it easier for you at a single point in time, but that's not where my focus will ever be.  It seems to me that a bit of patience will get you the image you want and grow the gallery for the good of all.

Pro Tip:
Want to change portraits easy?  Find the image you want in the gallery and right-click and copy the link to your scratchpad.  Whenever you want to change view your scratchpad as a message and then click on the link!

This message was last edited by the user at 10:20, Mon 30 Jan.

steelsmiter
 member, 1686 posts
 AWE, BESM, Fate, Indies
 NO FREEFORM! NO d20!
Sun 29 Jan 2017
at 14:04
Re: Proposal: External Portrait Images
I've been here long enough to have some idea behind the policy, and for me, 1,7, and 8 are far more than enough.
PrettyBirdie1
 member, 227 posts
 What spoon?
Wed 22 Feb 2017
at 21:48
Re: Proposal: External Portrait Images
Definitely agreeing with the mods on all the reasons external portraits are a bad idea here - but I will add one thing to this thread: with the talk of portrait submissions eventually being opened back up, I do hope the keywords will be improved. Trying to search by keyword is a mess and leaves out a lot of options that I might want.

On that note, who do I tell about duplicates in the portrait gallery? Especially in the older ones, I've seen several pictures that are merely different angles on what is very clearly the same character. While I understand having the same character multiple times (especially if they look different in those two pictures), having slightly different angles of the exact same character in the exact same outfit from the exact same distance is just redundant.
Shannara
 moderator, 3711 posts
 Keep calm, drink more
 COFFEE!!!!
Wed 22 Feb 2017
at 22:35
Re: Proposal: External Portrait Images
I would suggest, personally, that you just hold on to that information, and once portrait submissions are back up and running and those who are dealing with it are ready for more suggestions they'll likely let the users know.

While it may be redundant, people are probably using those images, and the one you prefer to stay might night be the one they prefer to stay.  Replacing them without warning might not be appreciated, and even with warning, it usually caused more inconvenience than it fixed.

This message was last edited by the user at 22:35, Wed 22 Feb.

PrettyBirdie1
 member, 228 posts
 What spoon?
Thu 23 Feb 2017
at 18:14
Re: Proposal: External Portrait Images
Sounds good, thanks!