Evening all,

Can people please enlighten me as to the rules with slip covers and images of them, or not,  as the case may be ?

My understanding is ( probably incorrect, at that ) is that, if a release has a slip cover then the image should be of that and not the keep case sleeve.

Unless ....the slip cover can not be scanned properly ( as with highly reflective materials ) thus resulting in a poor quality image.

In which case the inner sleeve of the keep case can be scanned aslong as it is identical to the outer ?

Is there more ?

I have read the rules and tried to apply them but seems there is a free for all with these things when submitted .....whilst I am in agreement with most that the image from the keep case is usually of a better quality if it is different from the slip cover in any way then it should not be used ?



Best regards

Cartmin

I think this will answer your question.

Not really Martin,     

How can it be 'identical' if someone's head is missing (unquote) or with a hole in it ?

Sin City .....changed from keep case cover to slip , got hammered in the voting process ....ultimatley to be told that there was a forum agreement because of multiple slip cover designs ? 

300 ...... no vote = " colours are better and images are sharper even though it is not the slip case "
( not that they were bad on the submitted one ). 

Casino Royale ...... no = " prefer exisiting "  different covers / different results of scan ?

HAHA .....I a see a pattern I thought ....if it is better quality image regardless of how much better ( that is subjective) use the keep case scan ......so i did on my next image contribution and got hammered because it wasnt the slip case even though it was clearly better !!!!!!!!         

Anyways, ..... if there a slip cover scan is of a 'reasonable/good' image quality then voters who just vote no because they prefer the colours in the keep case are therefor not voting correctly ?

People have a wonderful habit of of preferring the colours or sharpness ( subjective to your eyes, monitor and a load of other things ) of one cover over the other when it is quite obvious they are not a direct comparison of material / inks / even images ?

Even had some voters stating they are not able to compare directly to the dvd cover ( for whatever reason) but they prefer the original scan over submitted ????    Surely you have to compare to the original otheriwise we end up with covers which become further & further away from the original thru personalised tweaking ?

"colours arent as vibrant" because the original has been saturated beyond belief and their monitor is in black and white or something ?

" ....blacks  arent as black as original ".....maybe not but they are closer to the original ..doesnt matter apparently ......

" ...whites are as white " .....different printing of covers ?

hey people ......different shades of white and black exist .....not just whiter than  white and the blackest black

"cropping slightly out "  even though the one in the database is completely out of focus ?  In which case who gives a rats .........

" looks slightly warped " ....it has a voice box in it under it the 'press here' bit !!!!

Alot of voters ( and i mean no disrespect to anyone ) just seem to be come up with utter rubbish and i often wonder whether they are even aware of which image is which ...and some of the comments are just unbelieveable .......but like i said must be down to all the variables ?

Anyways apologies for the rant , .....  I am aware that people only want to end up with the best possible images in the database , I would like to help to do that .....but if we are all going to apply our own rules and personal preferances , or if some people are just going to look for any fault whether or not the overall result is better ,  we are ' up the creek without a paddle ' aswell  as putting alot of people off contributing images or profile information.
 
I, for one,  have realised that my monitor, scanner, editing suite  is crap , aswell as being colour blind....'should have gone to spec savers' .

 



Cartmin

Quoting Unicus69:

Quote:
Thanks for posting the link Martin, save me the trouble.

My take, after Gerri's post, is that the new scan should be of equal or better quality.  An inferior scan of the slip should not replace a good scan of the keepcase.

Unicus,

I can see were  Gerri's post was going, and i can see why you apply your 'own' ruling because of it , I am just reading it as ....Not an inferior scan ( how much inferior ) .....but a blatent poor scan or one which is impossible to scan.

Cartmin

Quoting Cartmin:

Quote:

300 ...... no vote = " colours are better and images are sharper even though it is not the slip case "
( not that they were bad on the submitted one ). 

I'm one of those who voted against your new scans for 300. The original are much sharper and for instance you can see the eyes on the front cover with the original. Yours are just not as clear.

two things

I find it so interesting that 1 discussion comes up regarding an issue, and it seems that the same issues pops up in like 5 other places right after. but back on topic.

I've only seen the 300 contribution since thats the only one that I own so I can only comment directly on that.
1) as the link Martin posted, the rule, when read technically, actually states that the keep case is to be used in a case such as 300 because as Gerri stated the UPC cut out and slight cropping differences aren't enough to make the images not identical. and the actual rules says to use the keep case as it will provide a higher quality scan (that is of course if 300 is in fact reflective which at this moment I can't check but i believe it is)
2) as a general image contibution, Gerri has also stated, that it is important to say why your image is beter, point out if your colors are more true, if your text is clearer, etc. but she said to be specific. in your notes for 300 you simply said "slipcase scans". thats pretty vague and if you point out specifics on why its better, or if the colors are closer to the original your more likely to get people to actually take a look at the acutal case themselves, see that yours are a closer match and vote Yes.

-Agrare

Quoting pauls42:

Quote:
Quoting Cartmin:

Quote:

300 ...... no vote = " colours are better and images are sharper even though it is not the slip case "
( not that they were bad on the submitted one ). 

I'm one of those who voted against your new scans for 300. The original are much sharper and for instance you can see the eyes on the front cover with the original. Yours are just not as clear.

Thats my point , whether they are sharper or not, they are not the slip case which was the rule i was trying to apply ( until i was made aware of the multiple designs of the slip covers available upon release ) and in this case it then makes perfects sense .... but it is not the norm and thats where it becomes a problem.

People can apply that every slip cover is not as good as the actual keep case art because they are easier to scan well ( reflective or not ) , so in which case we are better off saying no slip cover scans at all ......only use slip CASE scans ....for digipaks, box sets ...etc etc ....?

Best

Cartmin

Just a thought... shouldn't the image always relate to the IPC/EAN number. My own images are made with as high resolution as possible for clarity sake. Downloaded images are only used temporary until I can scan my own.
Case in point - box sets for say Indiana Jones, Lethal Weapon or Back to the Fulture.
I like to have an image that relates to my region's (4) release of the product. From then I like to have an image of the keep case for each individual movie that makes up the set. As long as I have the images that match my barcode of the slip and the individual movies, then I am satisfied. This also covers my insurance needs should anything go missing.
I know it may sound pedantic, but if I am going to catalogue my collection,  I also like to add images of the original movie poster and the equivalent Reg 1 & 4 releases where possible.

Cheers, ciao & salute

et tu Brute!