Title: Ultraviolet
Region: R2UK
EAN: 5035822620636

What is the point of voting on contributions when comments about the submissions are completely ignored by those who are screening/submitting.

A submission in the past few days for a SO CALLED IMPROVED COVER SCANS, was voted as if memory serves right the last I saw of it 3 NO 5 YES.

The comments all connected to the NO votes where BECAUSE the IMPROVED SCANS where all from a RE-RELEASE.

I do believe the Rules clearly state Originals have precedence in the Database.

If this is going to be the way forward for future cover scans the rules might as well be amended Now, and before anybody starts jumping up-and-down asking why don't I just resubmit the original scans, mine unfortunately are not that good (reflective cover) but at least they are from the Original 2006 release unlike the NEW ones 2007 release.

Comments welcomed.

Steve

The rules are the rules. If the Re-release covers were approved then simply resubmit the original release scans and state the facts in your notes.

As Karsten stated, the screeners are only human and to err is human .

Quoting Martin_Zuidervliet:

Quote:
I haven't seen the scans, but if they are superior in quality and almost identical I think this outweighs the fact they aren't from the first release.

"Superior in quality and almost identical" are irrelevant. The Rule for Cover Scans is quite expicit:

"If a title is re-released with the same UPC, but different cover images do not contribute the new images. This includes cases where a DVD was initially released in a slipcase, which was later removed. As explained in the introduction you may use your personal images in your local database, but they will not show online."

The degree of difference is not stated. Therefore any difference between the Original Release and the Re-Release automatically disqualifies the re-release scans.

Quoting 8ballMax:

Quote:
Quoting Martin_Zuidervliet:

Quote:
I haven't seen the scans, but if they are superior in quality and almost identical I think this outweighs the fact they aren't from the first release.

"Superior in quality and almost identical" are irrelevant. The Rule for Cover Scans is quite expicit:

[...]

Agree.
-

Quoting 8ballMax:

Quote:
Quoting Martin_Zuidervliet:

Quote:
I haven't seen the scans, but if they are superior in quality and almost identical I think this outweighs the fact they aren't from the first release.

"Superior in quality and almost identical" are irrelevant. The Rule for Cover Scans is quite expicit:

"If a title is re-released with the same UPC, but different cover images do not contribute the new images. This includes cases where a DVD was initially released in a slipcase, which was later removed. As explained in the introduction you may use your personal images in your local database, but they will not show online."

The degree of difference is not stated. Therefore any difference between the Original Release and the Re-Release automatically disqualifies the re-release scans.

Absolutely right.

Skip

I don't have this release, so not involved personally, but I thought I'd better mention that Gerri has stated in the past that she will not replace good re-release scans with bad original release scans.

No, I'm talking about yours - as you've already stated you're not happy with them quality-wise, I thought I'd better mention that Gerri may not accept them even though they're replacing re-release scans.

Quoting northbloke:

Quote:
No, I'm talking about yours - as you've already stated you're not happy with them quality-wise, I thought I'd better mention that Gerri may not accept them even though they're replacing re-release scans.

I recall a clarification about reflecting outer cover scans vs. inner cover scans, but she didn't mention original covers there.

Quoting Gerri:
Cover Scans Rule Clarification

Quote:
This is the rule:

"If a DVD is packaged in a keep case, within a slipcase of some kind, scan the Cover Images from the outer slipcase. If, however, the Slipcase is reflective, and the inner cover art is identical, use the Keep Case art to scan, as it will give a better quality image. "

As a screener, I can tell you that if someone scans a reflective cover and it looks significantly worse than what it should and the voters voice that opinion (not saying that their opinion is the overriding factor, just that it factors into the decision), then chances are I would not approve it over a good quality scan of the keep case art. And the alternative is also true. If someone scans a reflective cover and it looks reasonably good and there are alot of positive comments for it, then chances are I would approve it.

As for the argument for what makes it identical, in my mind, a cutout for the UPC alone would not make them not identical nor would it being cropped differently. There is a bit of gray here, and this is another situation where I would look to the voters. This is also a case to be very specific in your reasons for voting no or yes.

In both of your examples:
"Rear cover slip case has cutout so is not identical to keepcase ....
...Not identical. His head is cut off near the top of back scan, and not so on the Slip Cover's back..."

I would not consider these to be valid reasons for saying that the keep case and slip case are not identical.

-Gerri