Betty's Pub 20.1
Main Menu => Older Galleries => Topic started by: Betty on April 21, 2017, 12:43:51 AM
-
Our previous gallery of guys & boys crossdressing has grown quiet large. The larger interactive site threads get, the more there's a risk of losing or corrupting their data when backing up or moving pages & sites, or when rebooting servers. Our data backup, moving, & retrieval has gotten much more sophisticated over the years, & I also usually make multiple backups in case something goes wrong or there is a data problem. But I'm not one to test Murphy's law too much anymore. After 23 years of running Betty's & many other sites I know things can & usually do unexpectedly go terribly wrong.
So it's time to end the last gallery of crossdressers before it gets to big to maintain well & start a new one.
Enjoy!
-
More!
-
More!
-
More!
-
More!
-
More!
-
More!
-
More!
-
More!
-
More!
-
More!
-
I have some more pix ready for you.
But first I must remind you that if you're using image blocking apps or filters, you're blocking the best part of Betty's Pubs, & our other sites. It might be OK for visiting our stories site, which is mostly all text, but even there, by using image blocking you're blocking some features or parts that site & some stories. Here & our other sites are very image & multimedia oriented, so by blocking images, you're blocking most of what's popular here.
Also many of you are using ad blockers here. I use ad blockers too. But I leave them off here at Betty's or set them to make an exception for Betty's. Ad Blockers work by blocking ads from a known list of advertisers. But they also work by blocking anything on a page that's served by another domain or server other than what the original page is served by. But the content of Betty's is served by 4 different servers, with 4 different domains, plus 2 google accounts, & a very large cloud drive. So your ad blocker will be blocking some pictures, media, & video.
For instance, the galleries here are usually served by the server here at buffalobetties.com. But if a gallery gets extra busy, or during peak times of the day, a copy of the pictures may be served here from one of our less used servers or domains. So your ad blocker may block the images & media as if they were ads. During peak traffic times, problems, or attacks, entire pages may be served from another server & domain rather than the one that the site actually resides on. Your ad blockers at times, may be blocking significant portions of Betty's, or sometimes all of Betty's. so leave your ad blockers off, or set an exception for them for Betty's. Some ad blockers even block our hit counter. How silly is that? Most people don't mind hit counters & you still get counted, even if you blocked seeing it.
Also do not use VPNs, TOR servers, & anonymizers popular with hackers & spammers. We detect the ones used by bad guys & block them. If you use those bad ones, you get blocked too, or at least some portions of Betty's will be blocked from you. Most of those are a lie & cheat anyway. They're as criminal as the criminals who use them. Those shady ones don't really hide your identity at all, they just say they do. They show their ISP ID, AND your originating ISP to the web servers you visit when you use them. Only the really good ones hide your origins, most of them do not... they just say they do to get you to use them. And good luck that you don't get a virus or other malware by using them. Don't trust a system that caters to criminals & dumb people or they'll screw you. You & your originating ISP may even get blacklisted internationally with the crooks if you use those crooked systems that the criminals use.
Lastly, I still see people who only visit the last page of a gallery to see what new pictures have been posted. I still see the same people doing that for years.
When I post to a gallery, I can post over 30 to over 100 pictures to it in a day. So when you visit just the last page of a gallery, you're only seeing the last few pictures I posted, not all the pictures I posted there that day. Not only that, but I usually post the best, biggest, & highest resolution images first, & the small low resolution images last. So by being stupid & only visiting the last page of a gallery, you're only seeing a few of the crappy pictures instead of all the cool ones.
Also, I will not repost the same pictures over & over again. Please be aware of our older galleries & visit them. They're not here for me... I already have them. The old galleries are saved here for you. So check them out!
Anywho, here's more:
-
More!
-
More!
-
More!
-
More!
-
More!
-
More!
-
More!
-
More!
-
:-*
Thanks as always Betty.
Each time I see your pics I think to myself I really must organise the many (thousands) of downloaded pics of cartoons, caps, CD, and catalogue frillies I have on various drives ..... We've got very similar tastes in sissy material so I probably have mostly duplicates of your posts, but it's always great to see ones I forgot about.
I can't figure out why folks won't simply click on the previous page numbers? I'd be too scared I missed a great image I'd never seen before! Human nature I suppose ....
Thanks again Betty
-
A lot of them use the "recent" feature so only click on the most recent stuff in a topic, which will be the last page of a thread, but not necessarily all the new pix & posts in a thread. Likewise, many visit with blinders on, & just click on the last page of whatever has a "new" icon after it.
Most of our visitors don't even visit or save a link to our front/index pages. They come here directly to a specific section or thread they like or fits their "search" terms. After they checked the section or thread they landed on or saved, they move on without a clue that we have so much more to offer. They may only save a link to our Brolita gallery or guys dressing up gallery, or just a specific story or story section with no idea that we got loads of other stuff.
I find this shockingly true when I give directions to a page here or at another site to refer people to what they're looking for. If I don't give them highly detailed specific instructions, many of them are totally lost. It seems they can't use their own eyes & try to think a little. If there's not a big flashy colorful blinking animated icon, or an app for it these days, your typical modern web surfer can't get there.
Most don't even know how to copy & paste an address in their address bar, or type a web address into it. Golly, most people don't even know they have an address bar or don't know what it's for anymore. They think it's a search box, because on most modern devices, the address bar doubles as a search bar. Depending on their device, & on most modern windows machines, their searches may send them to a Bing or Yahoo search. A Bing or Yahoo search won't even find half of what is really on the web. You probably won't even find Betty's through Bing or Yahoo. It'll direct you to an obsolete page I made in 1996 or a page not associated with us at all... like a 1992 gay bar tour guide for sale at Amazon.
I get a laugh out of sites heavily populated by tablet & phone users. They don't post links to cool sites, online radio, music, & video. They post apps to them. They can't even get to a site on their own anymore or know how to search for one at google. They need to download & install an app to get to a site or they're lost. Then some these apps charge $1-$20 to download & install them. The apps are just a stripped down un-secure browser that link you to a website while they invade your privacy by sending all your activities & your device's contents to a company. They also suck up all your devices memory, resources, bandwidth, data limits, battery energy, & send you ads.
You don't need a bigger better $400 phone or $1000 tablet, with an unlimited expensive data plan, you just need to stop loading up your device with crap apps & learn how to use the real internet.
"There's an app for that" -- News Flash: You don't need an app for almost anything out there. Almost anything you think you need an app for is already available out there without one... usually for free. Just go to the site, & bookmark it in your browser so you can go there again.
Oops. Most people don't know what a browser bookmark is or how to use one. Most don't even know they have the feature. Some devices make it deliberately hard to find & use because they don't want you to bookmark the stuff you like. They want you to download, & install an app to what you like, possibly charge you for it, bombard you with ads embedded in it, & data-mine your privacy. If you can't find your bookmarks or it's too hard to use, get a different device or browser designed for the real web.
I was happy that one of my favorite free Linux astronomy programs is finally available for windows, android, & apple devices. But if you go to windows store, google play, or an apple site they want $2.90-$5 a year to download, install & use it (with lots of ads embedded in it). Nope, it's free & ad-free everywhere else. The program creators made it for free for educational uses for everyone. Just go to the creator's or a Linux site to get it.
You don't need to download, install, & pay for an app to get to Pandora music, Iradio, TuneIn, or listen to an online radio & music stream. You just visit the website for free to get it. But we have a new modern group of web surfers who don't know that. Their device & apps are leading them around, limiting their choices, & hiding more than half the web from them.
Many are in too much of a hurry on their touch screens, don't click around, so miss a lot of stuff too. They all want to hurry back to their Facebook & twitter accounts in hopes that they'll look cool with their friends by posting pix of their food, selfies, or funny clips somebody else made.
Almost nobody except pros & some older people seem to know how to surf the web anymore. If there's not an app for it, or Bing & Yahoo can't find it on the first page in under a minute, it don't exist to them.
----------
Yep it takes a lot to keep all those pix & stuff organized. I gave up trying to categorize them all too much. The sissy ones are in a sissy pix folder. But that folder isn't in "documents" but in a subfolder buried in the C-drive directory so if somebody ever does get in my computer, they won't easily find them. I back them up to an odd folder on an external drive too. In the sissy pix folder there's sub-folders for every year from 2003-present & a folder for all pre-2002 sissy pix. Pix are placed in them according to their "date modified". There's also a sissy outfits folder there for pictures not of sissies, but of frilly outfits. However if the outfit is modeled by a male it goes is the sissy folders instead.
I have a kinky sissy folder there too. Those are for pix of BDSM sissies, or rubber, leather, latex, & vinyl sissies. I even have a separate folder there just for panties. I have a "Best of sissy pix" folder for my very most favorite sissy pix. I just started a new folder there called "recently posted" for all the pix I posted over the past 5 years. Almost all of what I've posted here over the past 5 years has been expanded, shrunk, enhanced, cropped, or color altered. This gives them their own place without confusing them with the originals while still preserving the original images just the way I found them in the other folders.
Then I have "temp" folders of pix, or media for stuff I intend to process, modify, enhance, or expand to post soon.
You might want to check your old pictures. Duplicates of them that I posted may be better quality then the ones you originally saved long ago. In many cases the ones I posted are not just re-runs, but better quality versions. But often there are better versions out there, but at the time I saved them, I could only find a worse version. So feel free to repost anything that's better quality.
But a bigger picture is not always a better quality one. If it's blurry, it was just blown up, not better quality. Anybody can zoom/blow up a small picture so it looks bigger, but then it's blurrier or pixelated. That's not better quality. If anything, if it's a little blurry or pixelated, it needs to be shrunk to make it look sharper or better.
I also have duplicates. Often I saved a picture, then saved the same image from another site later that has a different image name, size, & creation date of the same picture. That's especially true when saving new images. Until I process or post them, & put them in the correct folder I may not remember that I already saved that image. When you saved dozens of images in a few hours, a week or 2 later when visiting another site are you gonna remember every image you saved before if they had duplicates under a different name?
I've posted over 20,000 pix at Betty's in the past 10 years. I have much more than 10 times that much in storage. I Wouldn't be able to keep track & remember all of them.
-------------
Digital Photography 101:
Just like bigger pictures don't mean better quality, bigger file sizes don't always mean better quality. A 600x400 picture should be only 25-70kb in size. If it's larger than that, it was saved in the wrong format or processed incorrectly, or with crappy software (or you may not know WTF you were doing?). It's not a 1995 digital camera. You don't need to process your images the old school way with photoshop on an apple. Those old photo-pro guys are just stubborn & still believe the 1990s way is the only right way. Some of them even teach photography & insist on doing it the old digital way is the only way. Well, they're wrong. Most of them haven't touched a windows or Linux machine since 1996 (if ever) or used anything but photoshop in 20 years, so don't have the slightest clue about modern & incredibly easy modern image processing.
Can you imagine if the movie indusry followed these old-school photographer's lead? We'd all still be watching pixelated blurry 200p MPG movies over 2gb in size that looked worse than VHS tape, or VHS tape at home. For any quality movie, it would have required several massive hard drives for a single movie, or huge reels of 70-120mm movie film. So your old "purist" photography teachers are wrong by listening to the ancient hype of apple & photoshop fan-boys/advertisers rather than trying something new.
Those old 78rpm records are great, but there's no way that they will be better quality than a modern recording. Abandon your old photography professors & their old students who still blindly believe them, & move on to the real world. Loss-less JPG is just as good as .raw .tiff .jpg or .png at a fraction of the size. That's what loss-less means! When you unzip a compressed zip or gzip file isn't all the data still there? Lossless JPG is the same thing.
Oh wait! The apple professors say you can't edit, process, or manipulate a JPG, & even if you could, it would ruin the original image. WTF rock have these coots been living under? It's simply NOT true. Unless you deliberately delete or overwrite the original, the original is not altered when you save an altered copy you made from the original. If you photo copy a page out of a book, then write notes on the copy, the book will still be fine. And .jpg, .gif, .raw, .png, & .tiff are not exclusively OS or photoshop files. They can be used & processed on any OS or program capable of handling image files. An image file is just binary code. When you alter or process an image you're just re-writing that code. It's not something apple or photo shop can only do or do better that something else. It does not affect the original when you alter a copy made in an imaging program.
How good your image comes out will depend of the quality of the lens, camera, your own talent, & your knowledge, not by whether you use apple, photoshop, & most certainly not by people who constantly preach digital imaging rules written in the mid 1990s.
In our movie section, we have 50 minute Star Trek episodes at about 140-165mb per episode. At 30 frames per second, by the old photography & apple professor's photography rules, each episode should be around 14,000 terabytes in size for the same quality. It doesn't take rocket science to see the old photography school professor & his fan boys are very wrong & the movie industry got it right.
We'd all be watching 300-360p at home & still be saving 200-240p VHS or pixelated MPGs if the movie industry paid attention to the way-outdated photography "purists" rules.
Thank god the movie & TV industry don't pay attention to pro-digital photography lessons written over 20 years ago. Most of that stuff was close to right in the 1990s, but was total nonsense by 2003. But die-hard fans, & their outdated teachers who don't know any better still hang on to that old crap.
----------------
Why do I rattle on for no reason? Because it's what I do, & Betty's fame used to be that I & anybody CAN rattle on -- and we loved them for it. If I don't insert it in a thread where those app peeps with blinders on go, 90% of our visitors would never see it, read it, or know it even exists. 90% of our users just go to a specific section or thread of Betty's, or just use the "new" or "recent" features to get somewhere here. They miss most of Betty's. So yep, I'm forcing some users to read, think, & explore who don't here. Worse yet, some come here just for J/O material. Some think that just happens at Stories, but I have to admit, sometimes I get excited just looking at a pretty dress or outfit. Drool --- Frillies!
You're in my sissy school. Expect to learn something or get spanked if you don't. For those who already had their schooling & know how to surf, & read... did you know you can scroll past all of this is less than a second? If you didn't, maybe I should write a lot more until you figure out how to use this new fangled internets thingy.
-
Thanks Betty for that dissertation. Being 71 I can't fanthom how people are so illiterate of the internet. They allow companies and others to persuade them that they have to pay to do anything. It's getting sadder everyday how people blindly follow the crowd not knowing that there are alternatives. I have more bookmarks than I want to count but I can connect quickly where I want to go and don't have to worry about my waining memory when I want to locate a site. Remember the 8 0's and 90's when things were just starting to get off the ground. I took a course on how to evaluate educational software in 1981 and we had cassette players that loaded the memory into our Sinclair computers that had almost nothing. Learned to program in Basic on them. Then saw the Commodore 64's come out and thought we had died and gone to heaven. I could go on and on but we had to make it work now there's an APP for that. A continuing dumbing down of the populace. Or are we just lazy or is this what we are destined to?
-
I don't think you're rattling on Betty. I quite enjoy seeing your perspective on everything IT and yes I did read through it all ;-)
As for duplicates, I use a nice "freeware" called Auslogics Duplicate File Finder. It is really good at knocking out all those dupes you'd forgotten about and is free of ads (if you ignore it's self promotional material - which isn't all that bad anyway).
Keep up the blogs Betty :-*
-
I have some more males crossdressing. Of course some of them are not real, but most of them are.
Enjoy!
-
More!
-
More!
-
More!
-
More!
-
More!
-
More!
-
More!
-
More!
-
More!
-
More!
-
More!
-
More!
-
More!
-
More!
-
I have some more pix of guys dressing pretty.
Enjoy!
-
More!
-
More!
-
More!
-
More!
-
More!
-
More!
-
More!
-
Found some more guys dressing cute. I've added a few more old ones from my own collection in this set, along with some classic sissy art too.
Enjoy!
-
More!
-
More!
-
More!
-
More!
-
More!
-
More!
-
More!
-
More!
-
More!
-
Found some more guys & boys dressing pretty.
Enjoy!
-
More!
-
More!
-
More!
-
More!
-
More!
-
More!
-
More!
-
More!
-
More!
-
I've processed some more pix of guys dressing up pretty.
Enjoy!
-
More!
-
More!
-
More!
-
More!
-
More!
-
More!
-
More!
-
More!
-
More!
-
Processed some more pix of guys & boys dressing up pretty.
Enjoy!
-
More!
-
More!
-
More!
-
More!
-
More!
-
More!
-
More!
-
More!
-
I don't know if anyone is interested, but GG6-20(20) is Sir Anthony Eden, Earl of Avon. A copy of the original (about the same size) was published in his autobiography.
-
I have some more pix of boys & guys dressing pretty.
Are they all really male like the sources of these claim? Probably not. You can't believe everything you read on the internet. But I'm absolutely certain most of them are male. Some of these people we've seen before in other poses here or at other sites. Some of the faces you'll recognize from pictures years ago when they were a bit younger or were a teenager. Also in ones where you can see their neck, look for the bulge of their Adam's apple. It may not be as obvious on some Asians & younger males, but you may still see a shadow of it if you look closely. Females do not have Adam's apples,
Enjoy!
-
More!
-
More!
-
More!
-
More!
-
More!
-
More!
-
More!
-
More!
-
More!
-
More!
-
More!
-
More!
-
More!
-
Found some more cool pictures.
Enjoy!
-
More!
-
More!
-
More!
-
More!
-
More!
-
More!
-
More!
-
More!
-
More!
-
More!
-
More!
-
More!
-
Thanks Betty for this little gallery of pics, and some I don't remember or have not seen before. I do kind of find the baby/little girl bondage looks a bit exciting as bondage is one of my hobbies.
-
Always something new & old mixed together. Although I like pretty outfits, I get kinky too. There is a kinky gallery. But it's at stories, & it's so kinky you have to be a stories member to see it.
It doesn't get as much views/hits though, so I'm not posting to it often. I had hoped others would post stuff there, but it's not happening. I guess if someone wants lots of kinky pictures, they probably go to sites dedicated to just the kinky stuff.
-
Hello Betty! I am so lucky, because you post a drawing from me! Its not the best. Actualy I whant to draw a Picturestory. But that was to much. If you have nothing against it, i will post more from my drawings! Ore visit me on DeviantArt under Teddyxx.
-
Sorry the pictures have to much Byts! I can not post them! :(
-
I found that picture on the stealing pinterest site with a google search. It wasn't until you joined, I discovered you had a deviant art page.
Resize and/or compress with irfanview. I see nothing in your deviant art page that can't be easily made into a 20-50kb image with no loss in quality.
Almost all of our users are using 800 pixel or less tall screens. Half to more than half are on tablets & phones. There is no logical or sensible reasons to post an image on the web that's so large, it won't even fit most of your viewer's screens in full size. Why shoot for that 10% or less with 1080p or greater monitors that the image will fit on, just to make it bad for the other 90% who will need to physically "zoom out" to a lower resolution to see the whole thing?
http://pearlcorona.org/betties/index.php?topic=1227.msg12503#msg12503
(scroll down or up from there to see more)
Irfanview -- easy free image processing software, no viruses, bugs, bloatware, adware. 1 million downloads a month since the 1990s.
http://www.irfanview.com/
Although designed for windows only. Mac users report running it with winebottle software. I successfully installed it on Linux with wine software too. But it took me about an hour of working on the installation to get it to all run perfectly on Linux.
-
Here's one of the larger complex ones I found there. I just by resized it to a size the fits the board, most screens of 800p or less, & used a little compression with irfanview (75 quality setting for no quality loss). It was also extremely pale, so just for testing purposes, I boosted the contrast just a little bit. It made it easier to read too.
-
Here's another from there. This time I took a smaller image, & took it in the opposite direction. I made it a little bigger & enhanced it, so it's easier to read, but still is a smaller file size than the original. I used only irfanview for all of it. Quality setting 75 for no loss. But I could have went down to a 70 quality setting with negligible loss or 65 with some noticeable loss if I really needed an even smaller file size without shrinking the actual dimensions of the picture.
I have to admit though, I use a couple of my own image processing software that I made myself out of bits & pieces of other software that I mended together for most on my image processing.
But the final process of resizing or compressing is always done with irfanview because it does it better than the rest with no or minimal loss (depending how much I need to compress). Also if I just need to do some simple & basic processing, I'll use irfanview because it's so damn easy, simple, & quick to use.
Don't want to ruin the original? When you save the image, rename the "save as". Like save image1.jpg as image1b.jpg. That way you have both the original & the processed image.
-
Thank you Betty! Its a lot of text! I need a little bit time to translate it for me, so i understand everything. The pictures looks good! And ther in no problem whith the qualety!
And do you like the Drawings? I have not a lot of feetback about them.
-
I selected some of the ones I liked. They're not as well done as some others I've seen, but were still a lot of fun.
-
Processed some more of guys dressing up.
Enjoy!
-
More!
-
More!
-
More!
-
More!
-
More!
-
More!
-
More!
-
More!
-
More!
-
I remember the little boy in the yellow dress who wanted to wear these clothes all the time and his mother said Why Not and allowed him to do so. If I remember correctly his father went along with his wishes also.
-
Yeah. That kid's picture keeps turning up on my sissy google searches.
Found & processed some more cool pictures.
Enjoy!
-
More!
-
More!
-
More!
-
More!
-
More!
-
More!
-
More!
-
More!
-
More!
-
Thanks Betty for more great pics and I love the photo of Grayson Perry my hero for dressing like he wants to in public.
-
I wonder how many would have ever noticed his art if he did get attention by crossdressing. I'm not saying he's a fake... he is a sissy. But in his case it helped more than hurt his success because it helped him get noticed.
There's a few other artists & musicians where crossdressing helped get them noticed too. But if you're an average electrician, plumber, tech, truck driver, cook, or public servant, it hurts your career more often than helps.
-
Yes Betty, I have wondered about that but I have read he has been an artist longer than he has been dressing, and seemed to make a pretty good living at it also. I am sure he got more notice for the award though because he is seen out and about town dressed quite often. I was also trying to think of other artists who dress as the opposite gender and were or were not noticed as much. Needs some more research for that I think.
-
Yeah but nobody noticed him much until he showed up to the galleries & photo-shoots in sissy dresses.
Doing well is relative, because it costs her/him much more to survive as we age. But he does have a better health care system than we do in the USA.
In the USA a serious illness, or the normal health issues that almost all of us have when we get older can clean out our bank account, life savings, & cause us to loose our home.
Grayson isn't doing as well as (S)he should be these days. The costs of promoting his(her) work & survival is exceeding what (S)he makes. Her best most expensive stuff took a long time to make.
The sales & profit margin is hampered by people who think the art borders on too much fascination with boys -- which may be illegal in most countries.
I hope, just like in the spirit of Betty's, Stories, & myself that she enjoys the fantasy role-playing of being the boy in a dress.
-
Here's some more pictures I found or enhanced.
Enjoy!
-
More!
-
More!
-
More!
-
More!
-
More!
-
More!
-
More!
-
More!
-
More!
-
More!
-
More!
-
Got some more cute guys dressing pretty.
Enjoy!
-
More!
-
More!
-
More!
-
More!
-
More!
-
More!
-
More!
-
More!
-
More!
-
More!
-
I have some more pix of guys & boys dressing up.
As usual, some it is new, some is old, & some is sissy art.
Enjoy!
-
More!
-
More!
-
More!
-
More!
-
More!
-
More!
-
More!
-
More!
-
More!
-
Founds some more guys & boys dressing up. I've also included more sissy art in this set.
Enjoy!
-
More!
-
More!
-
More!
-
More!
-
More!
-
More!
-
More!
-
More!
-
More!
-
More!