Quoting kimmie:

Quote:
Found out that most of the covers that were edited were approved! Probably cause a lot of people voted yes...

Most of the ones I've voted on are still in the queue. But, yes, some have been approved. I can't believe the 'Dead Man's Shoes' cover got approved. The loss of detail due to the ramped up black levels is glaringly obvious but only two of us voted no to it so I guess majority rules in this case.

Quoting Kevin Coed:

Quote:
The loss of detail due to the ramped up black levels is glaringly obvious

Not to mention the "enhanced" visibility of JPEG-compression artifacts.

Hey, I'll play!  777 votes currently tallied, that's also my lucky number!  Neat-o.

That rounds out to 2 votes a day - also a profile update every two days and a new cover scan a week.

Quoting T!M:

Quote:
Quoting skipnet50:

Quote:
I cast 50-100 Contribution votes every day.

Reality check: your user profile indicates that you've cast 7757 contribution votes since March 13, 2007. That means about 20 a day.

This got me a negative reputation vote?! I was simply stating facts; I didn't pass judgement, nor did I make a smart-alec remark about it... 

Quoting Giga Wizard:

Quote:
you did more than 20 profiles a day?

I do what I can... There are still hundreds of profiles flagged as 'yet-to-be-edited' in my database, so I'm not done yet. Yesterday I made 10 contributions, the day before that 19. Today I've only done one yet, but I plan to do a few more this evening. Note that things like changing common names and birth years sometimes generate many updates: I recently added a birth year to all Robin Williams-entries in my collection (based on this thread), and he appears in 24 profiles in my collection. So that resulted in 24 updates in a few minutes...

Quoting marcelb7:

Quote:
Quoting Kevin Coed:

Quote:
Quoting kimmie:

Quote:
Found out that most of the covers that were edited were approved! Probably cause a lot of people voted yes...

Most of the ones I've voted on are still in the queue. But, yes, some have been approved. I can't believe the 'Dead Man's Shoes' cover got approved. The loss of detail due to the ramped up black levels is glaringly obvious but only two of us voted no to it so I guess majority rules in this case.

Same with Lolita (7321931655415). The barcode on the back cover didn't match the profile! A sticker from the videostore was just deleted (along with the text underneath). Thankfully my contribution (made a few hours later) was accepted on the same day, so the correct images appear in the update.

Has anybody tried to contact the user (jasja) and explain that improving images isn't just "turning up the color levels"?

I've send him (or her) a pm, no response yet.

Quoting kimmie:

Quote:
I've send him (or her) a pm, no response yet.

I send him a PM pointing out he/she still using DVD Profiler 3.0.3.1126. The PM was read, it's no longer flagged here.

Quoting T!M:

Quote:
Quoting T!M:

Quote:
Quoting skipnet50:

Quote:
I cast 50-100 Contribution votes every day.

Reality check: your user profile indicates that you've cast 7757 contribution votes since March 13, 2007. That means about 20 a day.

This got me a negative reputation vote?! I was simply stating facts; I didn't pass judgement, nor did I make a smart-alec remark about it... 

Simply stating facts would not require starting off the post with 'Reality check' that could be interpreted as an attack, or at least antagonistic behavior. Also, was that post really necessary? I find it interesting that 29 hours after the original post you find it necessary to go and prove Skip's comment inaccurate. Could be interpreted as holding a grudge and/or following Skip around to prove him wrong.

BTW, it wasn't me that gave the negative...though I did find your post inappropriate. (and Martin's laughing at it even more so)

-Agrare

Quoting Martin_Zuidervliet:

Quote:
Quoting skribner:

Quote:
Anyway, I never never never take an existing scan and attempt to doctor it up.  I can't believe there are people that do that!  I mean, WTF, over!!! 

Well, if you do not have a scanner or exactly the same cover it's the only thing you can do except waiting for years until someone contributes new scans.

Actually, you do have other options such as making a post requesting someone with a scanner contribute better scans, which I have seen. If its not exactly the same cover, then unless the existing isn't the first release image you shouldn't be contributing it anyway. You could also find other images online to use locally. There are plenty of options available rather than editing the existing

From the rules:

Quote:

#  Image size must be at least as large as the existing online covers. If you don't have a premium registration, you will be unable to verify this. Therefore, submit only images you have personally scanned at 100 DPI or higher.

While its more dealing with the DPI of the scan, I feel that rule implies you should only contribute scans you did yourself. Pre-release images being the obvious exception seeing as no one can scan something themselves that hasn't been released yet, so pre-release art work (if available) is better than nothing.

Plus, to me it sounds like the edits aren't really of significantly higher quality (some copy of a copy going on), so were probably only accepted because of the amount of Yes votes (but that's a different issue entirely)

I personally wouldn't edit and contribute (or even do it locally) existing images anyway, but thats for my own reasons.

-Agrare