|
|
Groups: Member
Joined: 1/14/2011
Posts: 111
Rank:
 (2850)
|
lostinva wrote:Declined because it was the inner cover? Yep. lostinva wrote: I don't understand why, it really could be accepted either way provided there is not some other reason (such as it didn't have the barcode). It did have the barcode. No other issues. It was the title 'L'altra metà dell'amore', with barcode '8032442209200' for country 'Italy', declined on Jan 21. Should I resubmit it and try get it accepted this time? lostinva wrote: But as the guide states the inner cover is preferable because the slip covers are often first-run only. If the slip cover has different art than the normal cover, then it will turn out that the downloaded cover art it will not match what most users will expect to see. Makes sense to me.
|
|
Groups: Member
Joined: 2/21/2011
Posts: 29
Rank:
 (1735)
|
Hi
I am completely confussed. What is the point is posting this:-
"If you are submitting new cover art for disks you own, only submit it with the following specs:
1. Scan the actual boxes with the bar code on the back, not outside slip covers for individual titles
Example- Lion King, Alice in Wonderland and other Disney movies often have a slip cover on the outside. Do not scan this, as it is often optional and later copies of the release do not have it on the disk cover when you buy it in the store.
2. Scan it to a .tiff file. This file format does not compress the image at all, so when you upload, you will have the highest possible source image for the web service conversion.
3. Scan it at 600dpi with a bit depth of 24 for color. DO NOT use the interpolated settings- you must use a scanner that has an optical resolution of at least 600dpi. Nearly all scanners have this. And scan at the full 24 bit color setting on your scanner.
4. Scan at a resolution of 2995 x 4312 pixels. This size file is quite large, but the quality is worth it. IF you need to adjust the image in photoshop, that is fine. If you need to trim off a very slight amount of edge to make for a cleaner cover art, that is fine as well. Because this is a large image, when it is uploaded and made in to a jpg, the highest possible quality will still come through."
If you are not going to abide by these rules. People here are talking about scanning at 150dpi, 300dpi etc when it clearly states that you should scan at 600dpi etc.
Also when you attempt to import a full back cover at 600dpi saved as a TIFF my movies doesn't recognise it as a full back cover and does not split it between front and back it just loads the entire sleve into the front cover preview.
I would like to make sure that the information I try to contribute is acurate as I would like to make sure I get maximum contribution points and also make sure that other people don't end up with bad records in My Movies.
Thanks for any advice you can give.
Regards
Yogiman!
Life Sucks Then You Dump Windows!
|
|
Groups: Member
Joined: 7/4/2010
Posts: 8
Rank:
 (70)
|
|
|
Groups: Member
Joined: 3/8/2013
Posts: 1
Location: Aarhus
Rank:
 (5324)
|
Hey
I have one question
I would like to attach some image covers for some of my series.
The problem is that the barcode is on the bottom of the case and not on the back.
You cant insert the bottom of the cover anywhere and the the program will not accept when there is no barcode involved
How do i contributed this if I wanna upload some better images?
Thx
Thomas
|
|
Groups: Member
Joined: 7/26/2010
Posts: 902
Location: France
Rank:
(6942)
|
when contributing a cover without a barcode on the front/back cover scan CM will automatically ask you if you want to add a proof. Just say "yes" and upload a scan of the bottom of the cover where your barcode can be seen, this will go to moderation for approval.
|
|
Groups: Member
Joined: 6/15/2010
Posts: 240
Rank:
 (145065)
|
Scan of cover where the barcode is visible isn't enough, it has to be a photo.
|
|
Groups: Member
Joined: 7/26/2010
Posts: 902
Location: France
Rank:
(6942)
|
always did a simple scan of the part of the box where the barcode is visible (most of the time it's on a side of the box) and I never ad any submission problem.
|
|
Groups: Administration
, Member, Moderator
Joined: 6/30/2010
Posts: 4,066
Rank:
(140491)
|
stefaand wrote:Scan of cover where the barcode is visible isn't enough, it has to be a photo. Not correct, the evidence scan is essentially for verification that the barcode is correct if it is not on the rear cover and it is not displayed on the web service, a scan is expected, though a photo would probably also be acceptable so long as the barcode is readable.
|
|
Groups: Member
Joined: 6/15/2010
Posts: 240
Rank:
(145065)
|
My bad, was misreading the first post of Gugusse 
|
|
Groups: Member
Joined: 11/28/2013
Posts: 20
Rank:
 (180)
|
lostinva wrote:When you import a scan, it downscales the local copy to 250dpi... Quote:"When contributing covers to a title, the program will automatically down-scale these to 150 dpi… I believe much of the discussion is due to these references to dpi. Screen-based images do not use the dpi setting. When an image is produced for a screen, it is referred to only in pixels x pixels dimensions. Dpi is a factor when initially scanning a paper item, and it is a factor if the image is being printed on paper. But once an image is no longer being printed on paper, dpi is only present as an ignored legacy of the original scan, and in its place the pixels x pixels dimensions become the only unit of measurement that is relevant. The team says "Scan at a resolution of 2995 x 4312 pixels". (Not sure if that is width x height, meaning a front cover, or if it means height x width, meaning a full back-spine-front scan). But either way, we know that we start with a scan that is very large. So far, so good. When you press Upload, it is resized to what lostinva is calling "150 dpi", but since dpi has no meaning for screen-based images, the question is, what is the pixel x pixel dimension of the resized image? The answer might be found by looking at an XML export of your collection - an export with cover images. If you look at the XML export of your collection and look at the JPGs that are exported, you'll find all the covers (DVD and BluRay) have a width of 762 pixels, but the heights are terribly inconsistent. DVDs in my own collection range from 762x1086…762x1071…762x1078…etc. BluRays in my collection range from 762x880…762x881…762x894...762x903…etc. If MyMovies could just declare a rule that all DVD covers should be, for example, 762x1080, and all BluRay covers should be 762x890, then everyone would be able to contribute covers in a uniform size.
|
|
Groups: Member
Joined: 11/28/2013
Posts: 20
Rank:
(180)
|
I also want to mention that there is another way to eliminate the moiré problem that occurs when scanning covers - if you use Photoshop and are willing to spend a little bit. The Photoshop plug-in that is commonly used to eliminate the halftone screen-printing pattern is called the Sattva Descreen filter. I won't provide a link because I do not want to appear to be promoting a product. I merely note that this filter is what professionals use, rather than trying to use combinations of gaussian blurs and unsharp masks.
The MyMovies' teams advice is absolutely correct - scan at a very high resolution, like 600 dpi. And then apply that filter (if you have it).
I used to scan CD covers, for albums that iTunes failed to provide cover art for. That is where I learned about it.
If you cannot afford that filter, then there are ways to do it by hand, but it takes lots of effort: Scan at 600 dpi, apply a very light gaussian blur, apply an unsharp mask (but be careful not to create any haloes!), then reduce the image size, and chances are good your image will no longer have the moiré problem. The result won't be as good as with the filter, but it will be pretty good.
|
|
Groups: Member
Joined: 11/28/2013
Posts: 20
Rank:
(180)
|
Found the old halftone removal guide from an old cover site. First step is to scan the art at 400 to 600 dpi, then:  (I'm skipping the second method because it doesn't work - it involved using Despeckle).
|
|
Groups: Administration
, Member, Moderator
Joined: 6/30/2010
Posts: 4,066
Rank:
(140491)
|
willbueche wrote:If MyMovies could just declare a rule that all DVD covers should be, for example, 762x1080, and all BluRay covers should be 762x890, then everyone would be able to contribute covers in a uniform size. The thing you miss here is not all covers are the same size or shape, slips are a different height to the case covers and both DVD and Blu-ray are different sizes, full cover scans will vary in width with all the many different thickness cases as well, and many box sets are completely non-standard in every way etc. so it is not possible to have a standard pixel size. Provided you do not tamper with the image in some way to rescale it the system has both the physical dimensions to work with and the resolution thus it can adjust based on dpi level to a consistent quality regardless of the cover dimensions. Hence the cover processing is based on a dpi level that can be used with covers of any size and shape to arrive at a consistent quality appearance across the database. The minor variations you notice in pixel dimensions come from the inevitable slight cropping size differences in the original scans but are so minimal you are not going to notice them on the actual viewed images. Thus all you need to do to achieve a scan of a standard to be acceptable is ensure your scanner's DPI setting (as most have as the main setting for the purpose of determining scanning quality) is set to at least a minimum of 150DPI, obviously considerably higher is recommended and will produce a better result once downscaled.
|
|
Groups: Member
Joined: 11/28/2013
Posts: 20
Rank:
(180)
|
OK. Is it correct that the the final size (the final front cover size and back cover size that is distributed to users) is based on a 762 pixel width?
|
|
Groups: Administration
, Member, Moderator
Joined: 6/30/2010
Posts: 4,066
Rank:
(140491)
|
I do not know the internal processing, a pixel width of 762 is certainly a common result for normal width covers but there are many covers with a pixel width other than exactly 762, so it is not as simple as all covers are set to exactly that as far as I know. Only the developers could confirm exactly how this works.
|
|
Groups: Member
Joined: 7/12/2013
Posts: 9
Location: Genova (Italy)
Rank:
(1261)
|
If I can ask you something, what does "Improvable: front cover quality" means?
I mean, there were some covers in bad quality, I scanned my cover dvds and the results looks much better.
Maybe my mistake is the wrong resolution? or dpi? or size?
Thanks
Ooooh, an avalanche is comin' and I do not fell Prepared,
It's rumblin' like a mountain lion, I must say I'm scared,
And if not for the witch's spell you'd hear how I scream,
But since I'm only singin', I'll just Yodel till were Creamed!
|
|
Groups: Administration
, Member, Moderator
Joined: 6/30/2010
Posts: 4,066
Rank:
(140491)
|
Typically anything scanned below 150dpi will I think flag as improvable.
|
|
Groups: Member
Joined: 8/10/2014
Posts: 365
Rank:
(72441)
|
Quick question: Is .tiff still the preferred format (as I expect technology has moved on since 2007)?
Since I had not seen this guideline until now, I’d been submitting my scanned cover images in .png format. Does this create any problems? It seems to work beautifully both when magnified in the Windows interface and when compacted to a tiny image for the iPhone in a grid display.
|
|
Groups: Administration
, Windows RT/8 Discussion Group
Joined: 2/1/2005
Posts: 50,008
Location: Aarhus, Denmark
Rank:
(0)
|
|
|
Groups: Member
Joined: 10/30/2008
Posts: 96
Location: Romania
Rank:
 (14053)
|
Hello, after a long period I started contrubuting again to the database. As the country I live has very few titles added in the database I must add all my movies manually. And boy, what frustrating it has become....
It is a lottery with this covers. many of my uoploads are rejectetd because the front cover and back cover do not match altough the image editor says it has the correct aspect ratio.
Meanwhyle a title like this - barcode 5602193510615 for portugal is in the database (it does not have a back cover and the front one looks that it has the wrong AR - is almost square)
|
|
|
guest |