I noticed imx has been really show lately and also some sets that have been posted say image removed even though they still show the thumbnails but if you click on it for the full image that's when you get the error. Is anyone aware of what is going on??
Liked by 3 users: cdf99, FoolsGold12, Saint-Jean-Cap-Ferrat
Anyone know why these pics won't load. The thumbnails come up but full pics don't work? Seem to be a lot like this now with imx.
https://viper.cx/threads/2118766-Lol...light=lola+n.
Liked by 1 user: cdf99
The pics work for me.
There is an art to flying, or rather a knack. The knack lies in learning how to throw yourself at the ground and miss.
Liked by 3 users: cdf99, Pixel, Saint-Jean-Cap-Ferrat
Also working from here, but something to keep in mind (not sure if its your case but gonna throw it for relevance if someone has the same issue) but if you have an old browser without updates, you may not get auto-redirected to secure protocol (https) so change the url from http to https and it should work.Originally Posted by willowz24
Enable "HTTPS-Only Mode" for Firefox, "Always use secure connections" for Chrome, "Always switch from HTTP to HTTPS" for Edge browsers. (Naming can be different based on your browser version, but the logic is the same)
Firefox:
Chrome:
Edge:
I'm mostly using Firefox for VG these days. PaleMoon is too sluggish so I only use if for the odd set I want to D/L.
Last edited by Progishness; 3rd November 2026 at 07:35.
There is an art to flying, or rather a knack. The knack lies in learning how to throw yourself at the ground and miss.
I get it that some sites images (in this case AmourAngels/ShowyBeauty/TeenPornStorage) are huge jpgs, but is there a reason they take THIS long to download on cable from imx?
The 2024 image url starts i02.imx vs the later one which is i.imx.
https://i02.imx.to/i/2025/10/20/6d5h9z.jpg
versus a 2026 image:
https://i.imx.to/i/2026/10/12/76zvlm.jpg
Everything before 2026 is currently like some dial up era drag.
I opened both images looking at the Network response in Firefox (with VPN) and received similar speeds for both images.
Different images, different servers, perhaps cached differently due to age, but both load at the relatively same speed for me.
I'm also sipping coffee at 4:43am in the morning, and I haven't queued any downloads from the host to trigger any sort of traffic management or throttling recently, so add time of day, and daily usage to the long list of variables.https://i02.imx.to/i/2025/10/20/6d5h9z.jpg 2451ms https://i.imx.to/i/2026/10/12/76zvlm.jpg 2051ms
Last edited by Pixel; 4th November 2026 at 13:05.
Anybody else have issues with intrusive ads, despite being logged in on IMX?
This is a very recent problem.
Liked by 4 users: cdf99, Obsessy, Saint-Jean-Cap-Ferrat, sharks17
Liked by 2 users: mickg64, Saint-Jean-Cap-Ferrat
The ads freaked me out. Still processing it..............
Whatever the guy needs $$$$ for, take it.
IMX is too valuable to go up in smoke.
Liked by 3 users: cdf99, Saint-Jean-Cap-Ferrat, sharks17
Yup, I'm getting ads on IMX images despite being logged in. Very disappointing but I guess beggars can't be choosers.
Liked by 1 user: cdf99
I was going to say that it probably just comes down to when the bbcode was generated since i.imx.to and i02.imx.to both resolve to the same IP address, but I did some tests and they're definitely different...
Image URL
It seems to only be slow on i02 on the first attempt (above, it mostly shows the first 2 attempts being slow, but if I wait 1 sec after #1 finishes before making the 2nd request, then #2 is the same speed as #3-10) ... this leads me to think the server's doing something else, like copying the file across servers/networks first per-request, or some other kind of routing/reverse-proxy/load-balancing issue on the back-end.
76zvlm 76zvln 76zvlo 76zvlp 76zvlq 76zvlr 76zvls 76zvlx 76zvly 76zvlz
I dunno... there's also something fuckery going on that's making a direct connection significantly slower than a VPN connection despite the fact that speedtest shows everything as normal (with direct connection being slightly faster and with less latency, as one might expect)... doesn't matter what VPN server.
VPN connections: All basically the same, variation in transfer times was between 0.146 and 0.281 on all of the VPN servers I tried (Canada, Netherlands, USA, Italy, Hungary, France), and average transfer time varying by only 4ms between servers with the least and most variation (these all used the ~20MB "76zvlz" file):
VPN Server Latency/Ping Minimum Maximum Average Spread
(max/min - 1) * 100SurfShark: Canada (least variation) SurfShark: Netherlands (most variation)
Compare that to direct connections:
VPN Server Latency/Ping Minimum Maximum Average Spread
(max/min - 1) * 100n/a (direct connection) n/a (direct connection)
the more you know, the more you know you don't know...
For reference, dialup at its theoretical fastest is 56000 bits per second on a 56K modem000 bits per second on a 56K modem) would be 43 minutes to download the test image (and way longer in practice) ... if anyone's got actual dialup speeds, I can put you in contact with my friend who trains and races carrier pigeons.
click here for complete list of my collection threads
GirlsOnlyPorn β’ MomLover network β’ Nubiles.net (2004-2025 megathread) β’ PacificGirls β’ BoppingBabes β’ UpskirtJerk
AJ Applegate β’ Aria Alexander β’ Darcie Belle β’ Dionisia β’ Georgia Jones β’ Hannah Hays β’ Kagney Linn Karter β’ Kate England β’ Kenzie Madison β’ Kylie Page
Lanna Carter β’ Laya Rae β’ Lily Blossom β’ Lucy Briggs β’ Morticia β’ Red Fox β’ Shelby Good β’ Tara Ashley β’ Veronica Weston β’ Willa Prescott β’ Zarena Summers
(Studio Prefix Table)
If you notice any errors or broken/missing images in my posts, please PM me so I can fix them β cheers :)
YOUR MOM'S GOT A TWATβ’
Liked by 3 users: cdf99, roger33, Saint-Jean-Cap-Ferrat
Posting Permissions
Reply With Quote
