| Author |
Message |
| Registered: March 13, 2007 | | Posts: 81 |
| | Posted: | | | | I submitted a new back cover scan of this DVD because Magnolia has corrected the subtitle issue and included the "theatrical" subtitles rather than the dumbed down version that currently exists and is noted now on the dvd case art.
I got a comment that the older/incorrect version is the one that will be used for the online database.
My question is why?
If the older version is incorrect, has been corrected with a new version and that will be the only one authored by Magnolia from now on why wouldn't we want to have this scan?
Thanks in advance for comments. |
|
| Registered: March 13, 2007 | Reputation:  |  Posts: 20,111 |
| | Posted: | | | | For one thing, Magnolia is not replacing the "incorrect" version for anyone who already purchased it. Magnolia is also not calling the original release "defective" at all. They've silently reissued it with the same UPC and everything.
If you already have the "incorrect" subtitled DVD or Blu-ray release then you're simply stuck with it, unless you rebuy it...or somehow are able to exchange it.
Also, the only difference is that they've added "Theatrical" down at the Subtitles specifications which is a very minor difference. This is hardly different than any studio re-releasing coverscans with small alterations such as that.
Magnolia has handled this issue in a very unprofessional manner, and infuriated a number of consumers. | | | | Corey |
|
| Registered: March 13, 2007 | | Reputation: | | Posts: 17,334 |
| | Posted: | | | | Basically because it is the rules that the original release is what needs to be in the database. Now should this be an exception? Maybe... but only Ken and/or Gerri can make such an exception. | | | | Pete |
|
| Registered: March 13, 2007 | | Reputation: | | Posts: 13,202 |
| | Posted: | | | | Quoting scottiew: Quote:
If the older version is incorrect, has been corrected with a new version and that will be the only one authored by Magnolia from now on why wouldn't we want to have this scan?
Thanks in advance for comments. Because the older version is not incorrect. It correctly represents that release. | | | No dictator, no invader can hold an imprisoned population by force of arms forever.
There is no greater power in the universe than the need for freedom.
Against this power, governments and tyrants and armies cannot stand.
The Centauri learned this lesson once.
We will teach it to them again.
Though it take a thousand years, we will be free.
- Citizen G'Kar |
|
| Registered: June 21, 2007 | Reputation:  | | Posts: 2,621 |
| | Posted: | | | | If it shares the same UPC, then rulkes say the first release scans are what is to used.
It's the same deal as Columbia/TriStar re-issuing all those WS on one side, FS on the other disc as FS only with the same UPC. The data and scans are to reflect the original release per rules.
I would offer the scan in the "re-release cover scans" thread below this one, and probably lock it into my local if you have the fixed disc. Contributing would be against the rules. |
|
| Registered: March 13, 2007 | | Posts: 81 |
| | Posted: | | | | well, i think the rules need to be altered to reflect subtle changes for re-releases/corrections/or whatever you want to call this. granted the old is correct for that release. then this is a different release with the same UPC and should be adjusted as such.
if some to many people have two different versions of the same DVD (UPC) then allowances should be made to reflect the changes for those that have a different version however small the change might be or drastic in the case of a re-issued DVD with different cover art.
this is an archaic rule and for people who pay at least should have their collections reflected correctly online. | | | | Last edited: by scottiew |
|
| Registered: July 31, 2008 | Reputation:  |  Posts: 2,506 |
| | Posted: | | | | The problem with allowing multiple covers for the online is all the extra space required to store the files. While it's not possible to store them all in the online, many people do still share their re-release covers so that at the least their local can look exactly right. Although we don't know much about it, it's always possible that the upcoming subscription service for DVDP+ could allow for subscribers to upload re-release covers that would only apply to their/other subscribers collections. |
|
| Registered: March 13, 2007 | | Reputation: |  Posts: 3,197 |
| | Posted: | | | | With the small thumbnails available online, I doubt you could tell the difference anyway if it's just the small print that has changed. You're free to store the "correct" scan in your local of course.
But please share the full cover scan in the designated thread, I want to send it to a friend so he will know what to look for. | | | | First registered: February 15, 2002 | | | | Last edited: by Nexus the Sixth |
|
| Registered: March 14, 2007 | | Posts: 762 |
| | Posted: | | | | I don't think there is a problem with the rules as they are right now. The program can only handle one cover per upc so the original release is used. If we would be able to contribute newer versions of the cover it would just turn into ping-ponging scans. This is a clear rule and makes it easy. Everybody can use the cover scans matching their release in their local database. People even share those covers in the thread mentioned before. The rule isn't "archaic" at all because if you contribute the never release cover somebody will come back and contribute their cover again and so on and so on.
Dirk
Edit You might want to take your cover out of the case when you scan it. | | | | Last edited: by TheDarkKnight |
|
| Registered: March 13, 2007 | | Posts: 2,692 |
| | Posted: | | | | Quoting scottiew: Quote:
well, i think the rules need to be altered to reflect subtle changes for re-releases/corrections/or whatever you want to call this. granted the old is correct for that release. then this is a different release with the same UPC and should be adjusted as such.
if some to many people have two different versions of the same DVD (UPC) then allowances should be made to reflect the changes for those that have a different version however small the change might be or drastic in the case of a re-issued DVD with different cover art.
this is an archaic rule and for people who pay at least should have their collections reflected correctly online. just use phpdvdprofiler (like others - including myself) use, then you won't have any problem - the choice of cover for the online is down to you. | | | | Paul |
|
| Registered: March 10, 2007 | | Posts: 524 |
| | Posted: | | | | As the rules are today, the old cover scan would be the correct one. Best bet for now is to keep the updated version local. | | | | Invelos Software, Inc. Representative |
|