I researched that issue like 2 years ago and it doesn't seem possible. I did learn I could get the full size image from the thumbnail url by brute forcing a combination of letters and numbers, but it didn't work if downloads were disabled. (brute force script https://gist.github.com/Adidea/ebe6f5c6130aac9f24f6f884fbe9d37f )

posted a little too soon.

resizing the browser only seems to fix it when the layout switches over to what I'd call the tablet version. Vertical resolution doesn't seem to have an effect here.

Resizing my browser also fixes the issue. Seems to be an issue with detecting the bottom of the viewport.

Screen resolution: 1920x1080

Browser viewport: 1920 x 952

I'm encountering a similar/same issue. The 'Load More Submissions' button on the What's New page with the grid view doesn't work and scrolling past it doesn't load more submissions. Switching to list view and back fixes it.

On Firefox 46.0.1 - no extensions that should mess with the page or requests enabled.

No errors in the console, no http requests being made when clicking/scrolling past the button.

I think that's a fair breakdown for the ratings. I'm glad this is being looked into.^^

hmmmm.... I do see the value of sorting out fetish artwork, but I don't think it would fit well as a rating. You could lump them all into a fetish rating, but then fetish artwork couldn't be sorted by a particular rating without needless complicating things. A separate field could work, but it seems to be a bit much for just one type of content.

I'd think gore would fit well enough under a mature rating if something like it were added, but if there were even more refined ratings/categories I could imagine a general list of check boxes like "gore, nudity, sexual, fetish". I'd be content with the initial request though. The rest can sort of be managed with tags, but not perfectly. Not everyone tags everything or uses the same tags.

I don't see how this would really change anything. If it's displayed on your screen it can be downloaded. If you don't want people to have access to a higher resolution image then upload a smaller image... I do appreciate high resolution imagery, but I understand the economics of restricting that. ^^

I wouldn't imagine this to be a very easy thing to make. Users can often have thousands of favorites and scraping Furaffinity for all that information and finding matches probably isn't ideal.

I did just think of another way that could produce decent results. When users use the gallery import tool FN could index the submission id the image was imported from and then FN would only need to scrape the gallery pages and find the imported submissions. This wouldn't cover submissions uploaded directly to FN, but it seems like a reasonable alternative.

I wouldn't even bother with adding the website name, most of the tabs I have open right are titled with the pages content.

The favicon should be a sufficient identifier otherwise.

Including the id (https://beta.furrynetwork.com/artwork/id/artwork-title) in the filename could be handy as well so that I may find the page I downloaded the picture from.