I'd love to leo, but we have some users that make it all but impossible.

Skip

I didn't mention names so that I could avoid some of the people who do have grudges against Skip weighing in on this just because of their bias.  I guess the mentioned PM was way too big of a hint, though. 

My only point with starting this thread was to get some clarification on the topic and to prove a point to Skip that maybe it should be left to the people who have the actual resources on hand to make said corrections.  My trying to tell him that would have essentially been like talking to a brick wall.

I'll be the first to say I can't provide a good cover.  I do have access to a scanner at work - but my knowledge of how to work it is limited to "put image on" -> "hit scan button."  In my mind it works just like a Xerox.  That's why I contribute images in only two circumstances: no image whatsoever, or absolutely frigging tiny image that even my crappy image is better than.  As far as I'm concerned (and again, just my opinion) if someone comes along and cleans something up, even if it's just in Photoshop, that's cool, especially for sharpness and crispness. 

Recently saw a scan I wasn't real sure about the color on the front, it looked more brown to me and the cover looked more yellow (to me), but color is so subjective that I voted neutral.  But unless it's over-sharpened (have seen it, but not often) I'll vote for the sharper image every time.

CHarlie:

he ONLY exception I have to what you said, and in generall it is sound BUT. I look at overall image quality, I don't zero in on any of the innumerable issues that go into an image, I simply judge the overall image.

To give a for instance of why this is an issue, some users such as theishir seemed to zero in one thing, in his case he was addressing sharpness, now I don't know why because on none of the covers which I tweaked did I touch the sharpness nor even make an adjustment to any color, I touched one thing which was consistent with my evaluation of the existing images being somewhat washed out. I simply tweaked the black/white level a few points, now that will have an impact for the better in some other areas as well. But since I didn't touch sharpness or detail then I think it is silly to offer up such a comment. Like I said, I deal with overall image quality, particularly if I am having to judge something which is not in my possession; and unless somebody totally screws up the color they will never see me mention it.

Skip

Quoting bigdaddyhorse:

Quote:
Semi-related:

When someone submits a new cover scan, grab that dvd and check it out against the screen showing the old and new scans. Then vote for whatever is closer to the actual cover.
I've had cover scans declined because others liked "how the existing look better", when the existing were completely over-staurated with color. IMO, they did look cooler than the real thing, but they didn't look like the real thing!

Telling others to vote for what they think looks best is a recipe for disaster. Vote for what looks right. If a dvd has a crappy cover, it should have a crappy scan of that crappy cover, not a "tweaked to look cool cover" that doesn't really represent what the real cover is.

Couldn't have said it better! I recently voted "No" to a scan where all other votes were "Yes". The reason? While the newly submitted scan looked better & more realistic, the colours didn't match the actual cover in the slightest.

Quoting m.cellophane:

Quote:
Quoting Jubal:

Quote:
We are not dependent on ownership and thst has been stated by BOTH Ken and Gerri on numerous circumstances.

I'm puzzled by the fact that you routinely have voted 'no' to T!M's contributions on the basis of ownership and you've loaded up profiles you don't own to follow his contributions to vote 'no'...and yet you are contributing scans to discs you don't own.  When I vote 'no' on the basis that you don't own the disc, you accuse me of making up rules. Yet how can you know that your scan is a better representation of the cover if you don't own the cover and have it in front of you?  Making Photoshop changes at 100 dpi is like performing a medical operation with garden shears.

Your comment alone james, tells me much about your lack of knowledge about Photoshop and the changes which i made, which frankly are not micro operations. I am very confident in my ability to ascertain whether a cover a i badly faded from what it should be. Now you stupid coment acompanying your no vote which was against what Ken and gerri have said wsa niot substantive in any way, it was merely a stupid remark. Not unlike the comments which Rick made, which were al;so not usefiul or substantive and took me an hour of my time to figure out what in the same hill he meant. It is exactly those kind of utterly useless remarks, James, whicjh i find highly offensive, self-serving and certainly not communicative of ANYTHING. You HAVE factually ignored the Rules numerous times and created your own set of Rules, that is FACT, James, I am sure that you don't like it but it changes nothing it is FACT, and you know full well that I can list every such occasion where you have completely ignored the Rules aor created your own set.

IF and this a very big IF, you were really interested in the quality of theb database you would make useful and quantitative statements which reflect that you have some knowledge instead of the type of comments that you resort to. Let's for example look at one of my tweaks, which all said the SAME thing, James, I found all of those images to be faded, I made one change, James, ONE count it to adjust for the washed out look, I made a small adjustment to the black/white levels, there was one occassion where I felt like the black/white adjustment overheated the colors, so I dialed back the saturation level a smidge. I would posit that you don't know how to make really useful comments, James, for i have very seldom seen one.

BTW regards your comments about Tim. I do not consider Tim or you simply saying I researched this but i am not going to reveal the research or i checked the CLT but I am going to tell you what th results are, to be within the spirit of what Ken and Gerri have said. When he lists CLT results I can vote yes, I have said that based on what I am seeing, right now that massive errors are ebing entered into the Online relative to hos global adjustments and I have exp[lained why i am not willing to go beyond that statement, every title that I have reason to have questions about has been flagged and will be checked once i can get to my library again. Then we will see.

JHames, you operate in the world of doing the least, just like you list your 3.5 Crew changes but that data is utterly useless and i am sure you don;'t see the advantage in listing the Actual credits, if you did you would do so I am sure. This why I say you aren't working for the Community, you are working for James. There are lots of issues, James, but you aren't really interested in discussing any of them and i understand that, you have made that all too clear. You know James, I remeber one time you thought you had upset me and asked me if you were going to be re-invited to the Rules Team, do you recall that, I told you that your concern was baseless, and your response was <whew>. I was quite amused at your concern and still am, but I will also say that you have stabbed at me every chance you have gotten for a very long time.

You pretend to be reasonable, but you are anything but and anyone who is used to reading your words probably understands that as well as I do.

Now did you make any kind of substantive comment which might be useful, maybe even something like, Gosh I see what you are thinking Skip but on further inspection this cover does indeed look washed out; that James, would have been a useful comment and much better that you making up your own Rules again or making a meaningless comment which is at its core self-serving, James. Am I critical and your behavior...you betcha I am and with good reason. Well I don't carry agrudge, James, you are not to be trusted and your work is questionable at best.

Skip

Quoting m.cellophane:

Quote:
Quoting Jubal:

Quote:
JHames, you operate in the world of doing the least, just like you list your 3.5 Crew changes but that data is utterly useless and i am sure you don;'t see the advantage in listing the Actual credits, if you did you would do so I am sure. This why I say you aren't working for the Community, you are working for James.

Yes, I believe that "Crew updated from film credits" is enough. Your derisive YES vote comments that this is not enough have led me to pull the contributions. I don't have the energy to stand up to your bully tactics anymore. Sorry to leave you in the lurch on short notice, but I'm sure you'll be able to find someone else to be your scapegoat.

Look to yourself, my friend, look to yoursdelf. I find it amusing as I have said that yiou freely accuse me of making insulting and derisive remarks, while failing to see the same in yourself...and worse. But I likewise no longer have the energy.That I suppose we have in common.

Skip

Quoting hal9g:

Quote:
Personally, I have never, ever seen James make an insulting or derisive remark on these forums.

I won't say never, as I am fairly sure that he has slipped on occasion...as we all have...but, for the most part, I find James to be a very civil person.  In addition, I have never had a reason to mistrust any of his contributions.  In fact, with the exception of the few areas where we disagree on rule interpretation, I trust him without reservation.  His contributions will be missed.  Your, the general your, mileage may vary.