Quoting ateo357:

Quote:
Quoting Winston Smith:

Quote:
This has been an ongoing request for many many years, but here we go again. Why Ken has not done anything is unknown except to  him, thiough I could speculate but won't. Someday I am sure we will habve the ability to deal with multiple covers, but...now...no.

Why couldn't you just post a reply without the sarcastic remark in it? Every discussion you pop up in you have to be condescending towards the subject or to the people wanting to discuss the subject. Making personal remarks trying to belittle people.

As noted by another user this request is quite redundant and there are any number of threads already in existence on it...was a new one necessary. I would say no, and that is not sarcastic. Simply find one of the existing threads and boot it up to the top of the list...easy to do.

Quoting Kulju:

Quote:
Quoting Jimmy S:

Quote:

I suppose this request will never happen because of the server cost.

Server cost? you gotta be joking..

I have no idea what would need to be done to implement this feature. Is it difficult? Costly? Too time consuming? What reasons are there that would prevent invelos from implementing this feature?

Quoting Kathy:

Quote:
Quoting Kulju:

Quote:
Quoting Jimmy S:

Quote:

I suppose this request will never happen because of the server cost.

Server cost? you gotta be joking..

I have no idea what would need to be done to implement this feature. Is it difficult? Costly? Too time consuming? What reasons are there that would prevent invelos from implementing this feature?

Quoting Kathy:

Quote:
Quoting Kulju:

Quote:
Quoting Jimmy S:

Quote:

I suppose this request will never happen because of the server cost.

Server cost? you gotta be joking..

I have no idea what would need to be done to implement this feature. Is it difficult? Costly? Too time consuming? What reasons are there that would prevent invelos from implementing this feature?

I’m no expert but I assume that the online collection would have to be completely revamped. How would the online know which images to link to for a customer's collection? The only way to do this would be for each customer's online collection to have it's own image folder on the server. The customer's own images would then have to be uploaded just as the other data is uploaded to the invelos server. The problems here are bandwidth and storage space. Imagine 1,000s of customers uploading 1,000s of images to the invelos server at the same time. It would be like a DOS attack and crash the system ...especially if customers have a lot of hi-res images in their collection like I do. I scan mine at 600dpi then resize to 800x1100+/-. Those images range in size of up to 1.5mb per image and I have over 5,000 profiles. Where does one store all of these images? My image folder contains 2GB of data alone. Now imagine invelos having to store 1,000s of customers images on their servers? That's a lot of TBs of data. Invelos touts over 500,000 users...you do the math. Even if invelos were to put a cap of, say 2GB per user, that would require over 1,000TB of storage space for images alone. Ok, Ok, I know that's a farfetched idea, so...let's say invelos only allows the thumbnails to be uploaded and displayed on the online as is currently done. My thumbnails folder contains over 10,000 images at 127MB. Once again, do the math. As a minimum it would require invelos to provide at least 63TB of storage space for all of its users images. That's 33 2TB hard drives at $100 a piece. Ok…that’s a manageable $3,300 investment but where do you put all of those hard drives? Now we need a larger server cabinet…$1,500+/-. Our utility bill is going to go through the roof now…gotta account for that. As you can see, it’s going to take a considerable investment on the part of invelos to pay for all of this new equipment and costs to maintain it. How will this translate to us? Yearly subscription fees. How much invelos should charge? $15, $20, $25…??? How much would you be willing to pay to have your own images displayed in your online collection? Me, personally…nada. I already have my collection, with my own images, online. I assume there are many, many other users that do too. So, it’s a risk on the part of invelos. Would the return on investment be worth it to invelos? That’s up to invelos to determine.

That's just the server and storage element of the puzzle. As Karsten pointed out there's the Program and Contribution elements to be considered as well. It's not as cut and dried as some people may imagine it would be.

Quoting 8ballMax:

Quote:
How would the online know which images to link to for a customer's collection?

Well, that part would be easy, via ID.
Now the ID is UPC.Locality ... with multiple cover it would be UPC.Locality.Variant
No additional upload of pictures necessary.


cya, Mithi

Correction: Locality of course, not Location

and don't forget we now have the ability to store more than one disc ID to a title , so more than  one image cover shouldn't be out of the question....

Quoting DJ Doena:

Quote:
Every cover is allowed to up to 200,000 bytes. That makes 400,000 bytes (391k) per profile. Each cover variant doubles that number.
Currently, there are 550,000 profiles in the DB. To get a rough estimate, let's assume that only 3/4 of these have covers, but they use the full 391k. That means right now Invelos stores over 154 gigabytes of covers already.

I'm talking about optional re-release cover art only. Out of 550,000 profiles I think that 5% would be very generous estimation about the profiles which have re-releases with the same UPC. That would be ~11GB, if all scans would be hi-res. Invelos server specs are:

- Dell 1333 FSB Dual Xeon PowerEdge R710
- Dell 9G Drive Controller - SAS/SATA
- 2x Intel Xeon 5530 2.4 GHz Quad Core Processors
- 12 GB RAM
- 146 GB 10K RPM SCSI/SAS HDD
- 300 GB 15K RPM SCSI/SAS HDD
- 300 GB 15K RPM SCSI/SAS HDD
- 300 GB 10K RPM SCSI/SAS HDD

So I don't believe that the disc space is the issue here.

Quote:
And none of that includes the hightened traffic costs when you are up- and downloading more covers than before.

I don't know how things work in States but in Finland usually if you purchase internet connection for your server you pay monthly fee based on bandwidth your choice. How much traffic in bytes goes thru that connection doesn't effect on price. Adding this feature definately doesn't change the amount of overall traffic so much that it should be upgraded.

I don't know why Ken hasn't implemented this long asked feature yet, but I believe that server costs have nothing to do with it.

Quoting Silence_of_Lambs:

Quote:
Each and every DVD / BluRay that was released before 2010 needed a new cover if it still was supposed to be sold after January 1st 2010. This makes about 80% (if you consider about 20% to be OOP with no new release planned).

Does all re-releases use same UPC? And this is German only. Due the law change about rating logos?

Quote:
And even for those released after 2010 we have about 30% that have the so called "Flip-Covers".

Again, as far as I know, German only phenomeon.

Quote:
Not to forget the clowns in the merchandising-departments of the release companies, which released a movie named "Push" with not less than five different artworks.

These are so rare that I wouldn't count any effect on these.

No matter what, even if my 5% estimation is too low and the correct number is 15%, I still don't believe that disc space is the reason why this hasn't been implemented.

Quoting Kathy:

Quote:
I want my cover scans to match what I actually own so this is my number one request.

This is especially important for those who feel the same way but don't have a scanner.

The lack of this feature is a major flaw in an otherwise great program.