Hottest Actress Of All Time - NIT Edition

Status
Not open for further replies.
visionary

visionary

Well-Known Member
Messages
28,477
Reaction score
33,452
DallasEast said:





[Oh no! This side bar conversation is disintegrating before my very eyes! I better post something quick before @YosemiteSam sees this and restores order with guns-a-blazing!!!]

Say guys? Who was the better vampire?

Santanico Pandemonium (Hayek), Queen Vampire?

OR

Selene (Beckinsale), Death Dealer?



There. That should do the trick. Wait. What have I done? :omg:
Click to expand...

As a vampire I have to give it to Beckinsale but mostly because they were clothed. Hayek wins overall because of her body
 
Runwildboys

Runwildboys

Confused about stuff
Messages
51,964
Reaction score
97,388
CowboysZone DIEHARD Fan
visionary said:
I’m pretty sure this calls for a life ban from CZ
Click to expand...
RUHAsJs.jpg

Come on, look at that jaw....Mike Tyson couldn't knock this guy out!
 
DallasEast

DallasEast

Cowboys 24/7/365
Staff member
Messages
62,493
Reaction score
64,434
CowboysZone ULTIMATE Fan
lol.

I believe a thread similar to this would have attracted loads of participation back in the 1980's during my youth. Of course, the internet was not really the internet way back then. A site like this did not exist at the time, along with this kind of thread. Guess the degree of participation would be relative in either era regardless. :)
 
DallasEast

DallasEast

Cowboys 24/7/365
Staff member
Messages
62,493
Reaction score
64,434
CowboysZone ULTIMATE Fan
DeathMonkey said:
I noticed some of the pictures were women at their best and others weren't. *coughRIGGEDcough*
Click to expand...
That is a fair criticism, although the *RIGGED* part is a bit much I think. :muttley: I believe I mentioned this before in this thread or the previous one but I used a certain search criteria for gathering pics. While googling, I used its Advanced search feature with these settings:
  • Aspect ratio (Square)
  • Type of image (Face)
  • File type (JPG files)
I wanted as many images' aspect ratio completely uniform, such as 300 pixels in width and 300 pixels in height. Examples: 300X300, 600X600, etc. This would allow me to resize each of the images to a predetermined 250X250 size for my formatting purposes. My Microsoft Picture Manager program allows for resizing images in bulk, which is a REAL convenience taking, say, 64 pics of various dimensions and resizing them all of them to 250X250 at one time.

In my opinion, the bulk of available images are JPG. I estimate 90% - 95% of my final choices were JPG. Some were PNG, which is incidentally the best format for picture quality. All in all, I desired ease of discovery over image definition to lessen time spend on the pic search. Anyone can sue me for that. :D

Finally, Type of image. This may have been the most important criteria I wanted to adhere. The site staff repeatedly bores the membership to tears by constantly saying, "CowboysZone is a family friendly site." This mantra pertains to everything posted on the site, including (and sometimes most importantly) images.

Speaking for myself alone (so you folks try scowling solely at me okay? :p ) two-piece bikini pics are an automatic no-no. If that counts as 'rigged', so be it.

Next, I hoped to keep all of the images small, while at the same time, showing as much of any actress's body within the pic itself. This eliminated full body and many half-body shots (e.g. head to waist), which would have been small in the standard 250X250 image size I had settled upon. The 'final' option minimized type of image availability to 'Face to upper chest', 'Face To shoulder' and 'Face' pics in my searches.

Admittedly, I ended up doing some cropping of images I came across of actresses that just did not have many that fit the bill. That process was more time-consuming than I had anticipated or wanted.

Lastly, I attempted keeping the 'visual age' of each image as uniform as possible also. That was pretty tough to determine at times. Plus, some actresses, especially older actresses, do not have a lot of images on the internet to choose from that met my preset benchmarks as I had first thought. Some examples are Ann Bancroft, Elizabeth Pena, Lauren Hutton, Kelly LeBrock, etc.

I was shooting for fair in all the images I chose but already understood that would not always be the case. That's cool. Committees of one are not the best judges of anything anyway. :laugh:
 
Last edited:
nobody

nobody

Well-Known Member
Messages
10,968
Reaction score
19,590
DallasEast said:
That is a fair criticism, although the *RIGGED* part is a bit much I think. :muttley: I believe I mentioned this before in this thread or the previous one but I used a certain search criteria for gathering pics. While googling, I used its Advanced search feature with these settings:
  • Aspect ratio (Square)
  • Type of image (Face)
  • File type (JPG files)
I wanted as many images' aspect ratio completely uniform, such as 300 pixels in width and 300 pixels in height. Examples: 300X300, 600X600, etc. This would allow me to resize each of the images to a predetermined 250X250 size for my formatting purposes. My Microsoft Picture Manager program allows for resizing images in bulk, which is a REAL convenience taking, say, 64 pics of various dimensions and resizing them all of them to 250X250 at one time.

In my opinion, the bulk of available images are JPG. I estimate 90% - 95% of my final choices were JPG. Some were PNG, which is incidentally the best format for picture quality. All in all, I desired ease of discovery over image definition to lessen time spend on the pic search. Anyone can sue me for that. :D

Finally, Type of image. This may have been the most important criteria I wanted to adhere. The site staff repeatedly bores the membership to tears by constantly saying, "CowboysZone is a family friendly site." This mantra pertains to everything posted on the site, including (and sometimes most importantly) images.

Speaking for myself alone (so you folks try scowling solely at me okay? :p ) two-piece bikini pics are an automatic no-no. If that counts as 'rigged', so be it.

Next, I hoped to keep all of the images small, while at the same time, showing as much of any actress's body within the pic itself. This eliminated full body and many half-body shots (e.g. head to waist), which would have been small in the standard 250X250 image size I had settled upon. The 'final' option minimized type of image availability to 'Face to upper chest', 'Face To shoulder' and 'Face' pics in my searches.

Admittedly, I ended up doing some cropping of images I came across of actresses that just did not have many that fit the bill. That process was more time-consuming than I had anticipated or wanted.

Lastly, I attempted keeping the 'visual age' of each image as uniform as possible also. That was pretty tough to determine at times. Plus, some actresses, especially older actresses, do not have a lot of images on the internet to choose from that met my preset benchmarks as I had first thought. Some examples are Ann Bancroft, Elizabeth Pena, Lauren Hutton, Kelly LeBrock, etc.

I was shooting for fair in all the images I chose but already understood that would not always be the case. That's cool. Committees of one are not the best judges of anything anyway. :laugh:
Click to expand...

Dude, I'm just busting your chops and just screwing around. I disagree with a lot of the winners, but this is YOUR contest. :)
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Top