http://(Type any keyword here).jpg.to(jpg.to)
jpg.to
http://(Type any keyword here).jpg.to
http://jpg.to
58 comments
Another good suggestion. I would definitely implement something exact or very similar to this if the api allows. Stay tuned :)
Quizlet.com is good for this and will autosearch Flickr for a picture matching each word when you create flashcards.
Quizlet is awesome, but the use-case for this new tool could be:
a) mentioning new vocab off-the-cuff (or in response to a question) in class and immediately showing a picture of it
b) students trying to remember a word and me showing them pictures of words they are guessing until they see the right thing
c) Us making up sample sentences on-the-fly and using a background picture as an impromptu slide: "Darth Vader is hungry. He could make a sandwich. He may toast some broad. He might eat it later": http://darth.vader.bread.jpg.to/
a) mentioning new vocab off-the-cuff (or in response to a question) in class and immediately showing a picture of it
b) students trying to remember a word and me showing them pictures of words they are guessing until they see the right thing
c) Us making up sample sentences on-the-fly and using a background picture as an impromptu slide: "Darth Vader is hungry. He could make a sandwich. He may toast some broad. He might eat it later": http://darth.vader.bread.jpg.to/
The only issue is: I need a much larger rez image to put up on the big projector.
There doesn't appear to be any size checking at all. I got a doozy:
http://senator.jpg.to/
There doesn't appear to be any size checking at all. I got a doozy:
http://senator.jpg.to/
Good ideas.
Works like expected: http://fffffffuuuuuuuuuuuu.jpg.to
Reddit will have a field day with this.
Works like expected: http://fffffffuuuuuuuuuuuu.jpg.to
Reddit will have a field day with this.
I started with http://hello.jpg.to/ and was delighted by the results, thinking that the web app translated my phrase into a variety of languages and then made a stylish motif. Eagerly, I typed in http://goodbye.jpg.to/ to see, again, what looked like a totally custom image based on random text that I put in. I have to admit, I found this to be http://totallyawesome.jpg.to/ at this point, pressing F5 and hoping for other stylized generations.
After not seeing any, I decided to just try my name ... and found a football player.
After not seeing any, I decided to just try my name ... and found a football player.
Cute. Needs a method to return the URL as a 301 redirect so it could be used as a placeholder image. This could be in the image filename.
For example: http://kittens.jpg.to/301.jpg
Another feature could be to return a random result for that image search.
For example: http://ass.jpg.to/random.jpg
For example: http://kittens.jpg.to/301.jpg
Another feature could be to return a random result for that image search.
For example: http://ass.jpg.to/random.jpg
The random functionality in conjunction with an ability to specify crop size would make this my defacto placeholder site.
Being able to choose what I want for my placeholder would be extremely useful.
http://food.jpg.to/random300x500.jpg
Being able to choose what I want for my placeholder would be extremely useful.
http://food.jpg.to/random300x500.jpg
If you like kittens, placekitten does that:
http://placekitten.com/
http://placekitten.com/
It's a good idea. I'm going to implement similar functions soon. Stay tuned :)
It is the first image result on google image search. The previous comments on different keywords verified this. To amaze yourself, try "sex" and "male"
behind-the-scene technical aspect are not difficult to realize (either google image API, which is deprecated, or parse the result of http://www.google.com/search?tbm=isch&hl=en&source=h... and get the first image url after a predefined string anchor, say <span class=rg_ctlv>), but the idea to simplify input and output is brilliant.
To deal with not-so-good image search result: since google image search is presenting the result in a thumbnail group, it might be worthwhile to look into their ranking scheme for the result. It might be that the first one (on the top left) is not the most relevant result. It won't shock me if google ranked the relevance of result from center to peripheral. In the end that's how we look at a pile of images--we tend to start from the middle. Try a few examples, from the ones I tried the middle row middle column image is much more relevant than the top left result.
just my two cents.
behind-the-scene technical aspect are not difficult to realize (either google image API, which is deprecated, or parse the result of http://www.google.com/search?tbm=isch&hl=en&source=h... and get the first image url after a predefined string anchor, say <span class=rg_ctlv>), but the idea to simplify input and output is brilliant.
To deal with not-so-good image search result: since google image search is presenting the result in a thumbnail group, it might be worthwhile to look into their ranking scheme for the result. It might be that the first one (on the top left) is not the most relevant result. It won't shock me if google ranked the relevance of result from center to peripheral. In the end that's how we look at a pile of images--we tend to start from the middle. Try a few examples, from the ones I tried the middle row middle column image is much more relevant than the top left result.
just my two cents.
Very nice observation!
I take that since your website didn't state any call limit, you must be using the second method (parsing google image result page).
Give user option to get more photo (in ways like: /1, /2) as the index of result page. Or even randomize the result (provide an option to random deliver the result, so same call doesn't result in the same image) might serve the user good. lots of ideas.
Give user option to get more photo (in ways like: /1, /2) as the index of result page. Or even randomize the result (provide an option to random deliver the result, so same call doesn't result in the same image) might serve the user good. lots of ideas.
Thanks for your ideas. In fact it's using the image search api and I think I would have implemented social voting to replace search before the limit runs out (if any).
is it allowed by google to parse search result page?
jpg.to does not seem to be a complete metric space. The Cauchy sequence of Pi does seem to converge to Pi.
http://jpg.to/
http://3.jpg.to/
http://3.1.jpg.to/
http://3.14.jpg.to/
http://3.141.jpg.to/
http://3.1415.jpg.to/
http://3.14159.jpg.to/
http://3.141592.jpg.to/
http://3.14159265.jpg.to/
http://3.141592653.jpg.to/
http://3.1415926535.jpg.to/
The number of references to pi seems to decrease as the precision increases.
Seems to me that the precision is greatest at http://3.14.jpg.to/, which has 1 reference.
This is the "I'm feeling lucky" of google images eh?
http://gigawatt.jpg.to/
http://gigawatt.jpg.to/
Author says it is powered by google images. Which is ironic:
http://bing.jpg.to/ (what you'd expect)
http://google.jpg.to/ (not what you'd expect)
http://bing.jpg.to/ (what you'd expect)
http://google.jpg.to/ (not what you'd expect)
with google.jpg.to I was taken to http://www.google.com/intl/en_com/images/srpr/logo3w.png , pretty much what I was expecting.
That's what you get now, but that wasn't the case earlier. The author says he patched it for that keyword ("google").
Yes, that's weird..
btw, I just manually patched this.
btw, no love for "yahoo" either.
Or "microsoft" http://microsoft.jpg.to/
This gives a broken image icon. Very fitting :)
Yes, it works kind of like it.
This is nice. It will be more fun if you show a different image on each reload.
Good idea!
No, please don't change it that way! The best use case for this is sharing images quickly. If I can't trust that my http://homer%20simpson.jpg.to/ is going to be the same one loaded by my friend, then I won't share it with my friend. This could be pretty handy in it's current state.
I will keep http://keyword.jpg.to/ a fixed image while making keyword.jpg.to/random or /r whatever to rotate image randomly. No worry :)
Doing /r would be eminently more handy, ftr.
That's awesome :)
And it's not even limited to jpg, cf. http://drumroll.jpg.to/
And it's not even limited to jpg, cf. http://drumroll.jpg.to/
Note that you can put in spaces by using dots or %2b
http://large.gorilla.eating.a.taco.jpg.to/
http://baby%2belephant.jpg.to/
http://large.gorilla.eating.a.taco.jpg.to/
http://baby%2belephant.jpg.to/
UTF8 characters are supported too!
e.g. http://ハッカー.jpg.to (ハッカー means hacker in japanese, I found it from google translate)
Note that that particular word is a katakana phonetic import from English; in romaji that reads "hakkaa". So while that works as an example of multilingual character support, it may not be the best example for a foreign word per se. :-)
http://pookie.jpg.to/
Bahahaha
I'd rather prefer it to directly stream the image, not an <img src='...'/> to somewhere else. This version is not useful for anybody.
Good observation.
But if you embed it on webpage (in which refer header is sent)
it would turn into real image file, which means it WORKS when you include it in forum, blogs, etc. :)
Refer header is not a good way to distinguish between embedded images and images accessed directly by user. AFAIK that header will have the same value both when you load an embedded image and when you click on a direct link to the image.
I did a little bit of research about it few years ago; the summary can be seen here:
http://temporal.pr0.pl/devblog/2009/09/14/eksperyment-podsum... (pl_PL)
http://translate.google.com/translate?sl=pl&tl=en&js... (en_US)
Basically, I was able to distinguish between embedded and directly accessed images by analyzing the content of Accept header. It wasn't perfect (it didn't work for Opera), but I think it could be good enough to do something useful with it.
I did a little bit of research about it few years ago; the summary can be seen here:
http://temporal.pr0.pl/devblog/2009/09/14/eksperyment-podsum... (pl_PL)
http://translate.google.com/translate?sl=pl&tl=en&js... (en_US)
Basically, I was able to distinguish between embedded and directly accessed images by analyzing the content of Accept header. It wasn't perfect (it didn't work for Opera), but I think it could be good enough to do something useful with it.
As 'cute' as this is please find a different API to use or at least find a way to attribute where you are _stealing_ the images from and ensure that the owners of the images are happy with you using the images.
Just because an image is on the internet does not mean you can reproduce it. I ran a couple of words I knew return copyrighted images and sure enough they come up.
Just because an image is on the internet does not mean you can reproduce it. I ran a couple of words I knew return copyrighted images and sure enough they come up.
Very true. I planned to introduce a page for every image to attribute the source in the near future. And I would delete them upon the owner's request. (just like youtube video)
I'm sorry but this is not good enough. You should try to do better than "what Youtube does".
Delete upon owner request (a la DMCA) is a legal maneuver. You should be able to parse out if an image is licensed as Creative Commons or public domain and show only those pictures. Else assume all rights reserved.
Not to pick on your project but it's time that people try to do better than take the easiest path of show all images (without attribution) because it was the most convenient thing to do.
(If you are going to do the delete on owner request thing, at least consider providing an immediate link to delete without 1) have to mail a paper request in, 2) having to sign in or 3) some other onerous route to delete)
Delete upon owner request (a la DMCA) is a legal maneuver. You should be able to parse out if an image is licensed as Creative Commons or public domain and show only those pictures. Else assume all rights reserved.
Not to pick on your project but it's time that people try to do better than take the easiest path of show all images (without attribution) because it was the most convenient thing to do.
(If you are going to do the delete on owner request thing, at least consider providing an immediate link to delete without 1) have to mail a paper request in, 2) having to sign in or 3) some other onerous route to delete)
Thanks for your advice. I will probably handle this issue in the next few updates.
Do you have a realistic way to go about this?
Especially in what is more than likely a 50 line project.
I really disagree with the approach of blowing apart a fun project and insisting bloat like a text parsing engine be added to make you happy.
http://keyword.jpg.to/source or http://keyword.jpg.to/s would do just fine IMO.
I really disagree with the approach of blowing apart a fun project and insisting bloat like a text parsing engine be added to make you happy.
http://keyword.jpg.to/source or http://keyword.jpg.to/s would do just fine IMO.
Fun does not mean you should ignore copyright.
Copyright info is readily available in EXIF or other metadata.
It's also trivial to add a link at the bottom saying remove image. No confirmation/signup needed. Viola, instant delete.
Copyright info is readily available in EXIF or other metadata.
It's also trivial to add a link at the bottom saying remove image. No confirmation/signup needed. Viola, instant delete.
If you are not going to validate that you have the rights to display the image the minimum thing you can do is add attribution to every page the image is displayed. Not a separate page.
If it linked to the source of the image, wouldn't it just be a minimalist search engine? Surely google doesn't individually license every image that shows up in image search.
I don't know what you think the site is doing but that is exactly what it is. It didn't curate the images, people didn't upload the images. It searched for an image that matched your word. No google didn't licence the image, but it only displays small thumbnails with a link to where it found the image. This is displaying the full size image with no link to where it found the image.
Thanks for your opinion. It will be handled better in the next few updates :)
Just because the image is copyrighted doesn't mean you are violating copyright law by displaying it. It would be quite nice of you to display a link to the site that Google found the image on - but if this is a non-commercial site, you have a very good fair use claim. If you really wanted to be in the clear, you could change your image search default to show "images labeled for reuse." Either way, don't be cowed by copyright maximalists.
Like this http://spot.jpg.to/ ?
[deleted]
http://crazy.jpg.to/ doesn't work for some reason.
Not working for me? I keep getting this: Sorry, image not found. Please try other keywords.
Which keyword did you type? Try using shorter words like http://stevejobs.jpg.to
The suggested links. http://apple.jpg.to doesn't work for me.
Please try http://orange.jpg.to or other keywords to see if it works.
It finally worked. Absolutely wasn't before, but not sure what changed.
Awesome! THanks.
Awesome! THanks.
I thought this was pretty cool and so shared the link with my friend, who asked me - 'so whats the point?'. And then I was like http://notsure.jpg.to
I am also thinking about the possibilities of the service. Do you have any idea? :)
This is a little bookmarklet for you. Select some text in a page then run it. It will open a new window {selected text}.jpg.to.
javascript:(function(){var A='';if(window.getSelection) A=window.getSelection().toString();else if(document.getSelection) A=document.getSelection().toString();else if(document.selection) A=document.selection.createRange().text;A=A.replace(/\s+/,'-');if(A===''||!/^[a-z0-9_\-]+$/i.test(A))A='try-again';window.open('http://'+encodeURIComponent(A.toLowerCase())+'.jpg.to');}());
Thanks so much for your work. Just added it to my browser :)
Very cool stuff. Interesting progression:
http://1.jpg.to/
http://11.jpg.to/
http://111.jpg.to/
http://1111.jpg.to/
http://11111.jpg.to/
http://111111.jpg.to/ (I was hoping to get something related to November/11/2011 here).
http://1.jpg.to/
http://11.jpg.to/
http://111.jpg.to/
http://1111.jpg.to/
http://11111.jpg.to/
http://111111.jpg.to/ (I was hoping to get something related to November/11/2011 here).
I like this a lot. Placehold.it features would be nice, too. so like, if I wanted just a picture of Bruce Willis: http://bruce_wilis.jpg.to/
But then if I needed a 500x500 picture of Bruce Willis, because who doesn't, I could go to http://bruce_wilis.jpg.to/500x500
Fun little app. Nice work.
But then if I needed a 500x500 picture of Bruce Willis, because who doesn't, I could go to http://bruce_wilis.jpg.to/500x500
Fun little app. Nice work.
http://meme.jpg.to/(I don't have any idea what this meme is.)
Also, I want to see the source code. I think it uses the I'm Feeling Lucky page of Google Image API, but I'm a noob, so it would be nice if I could have an idea of how you made that site.
Basically, the idea is to take the subdomain of the url as keyword and search it through Google's image search api and return the 1st result.
I like the idea, and it works. Here's two constructive concerns:
1. Can you make this faster to type than a browser extension that searches from the address bar (or in Chrome's case, omnibox)?
2. How do you account for false positives, like a picture that doesn't match the word?
1. Can you make this faster to type than a browser extension that searches from the address bar (or in Chrome's case, omnibox)?
2. How do you account for false positives, like a picture that doesn't match the word?
1. keyword.jpg.to is the most intuitive and easy to type domain I can think of at the moment. If you got a better idea please tell me :)
2. I planned to allow image upload and voting to select the best image that match the word. I believe this method can give better result in the long term.
Very simple and very amusing. Or maybe I'm just easily entertained. It got my gravatar picture when I entered my full name, which was cool.
hn.jpg.to, on the other hand, is probably not related to hacker news :)
hn.jpg.to, on the other hand, is probably not related to hacker news :)
Thanks. I am planning to add functions to let users upload and vote for the keywords.jpg.to urls so more relevant results will show up.
This is also very handy that I plan to use: http://www.sencha.com/learn/how-to-use-src-sencha-io/
Some favorites: http://failwhale.jpg.to/ http://octocat.jpg.to/
Winning: http://chattanooga.jpg.to/
It works pretty well, although there are some oddball results.
Unbelievably, you probably want to turn off SafeSearch before letting kids explore the site...
http://vagina.jpg.to/
http://vagina.jpg.to/
Imsy (www.imsy.com) offers this same feature in a slightly different way. It lets you send the image as an attachment in iMessage
I wrote my first and last name (no spaces) and it showed a picture of my cat. I was thoroughly pleased :)
Duqu author caught red handed.
http://duqu.jpg.to/
getting an error on http://facebook.jpg.to/
not anymore. he probably pathced this one too.
Cool idea. I immediately tried "boobs" and was not disappointed.
I see changes coming in as I try more things. Good job folkster!
anybody tried "hahahah" or "lala"? ... those were the first two I tried and it gave a totally wrong impression of what the service is all about :D
I think http://ethan.jpg.to/ is my favorite.
http://dumbsluts.jpg.to/ goes to sarah palin
hahahahaha
Very, very nice. :)
sun
e.g. apple.jpg.to
hot.jpg.to
[deleted]
Is there any way to flag a photo? I just made a search for a dog type and found an inappropriate photo unfortunately...
I will implement upload, voting and flagging features soon, thanks for your suggestion!
looks like a catchall apache url rewrite rule with some rewriting voodoo to corresponding google image hits, pretty lame imho
also the dns is not setup corectly to handle spaces in domains mentioned here
also the dns is not setup corectly to handle spaces in domains mentioned here
It seems whitespace is not allowed in subdomain. I need to research further to confirm it.
ha..i like it. it just searches the internet for images with that search term.
The only issue is: I need a much larger rez image to put up on the big projector. Since this is doing Google Image Search... any chance for a:
http://keyword.jpg.to/large
http://keyword.jpg.to/medium
[plus]
http://keyword.jpg.to/photo
http://keyword.jpg.to/clipart
[plus]
http://keyword.jpg.to/red
http://keyword.jpg.to/green
http://keyword.jpg.to/white