Welcome to the Invelos forums. Please read the forum rules before posting.

Read access to our public forums is open to everyone. To post messages, a free registration is required.

If you have an Invelos account, sign in to post.

Invelos Forums->Posts by wazh Page: 1  Previous   Next
Message Details
That's a very interesting idea - which I had never thought of. I certainly have been looking in that dir to work out what scans really need some work. However I thought that the image that was there would be tied somehow to profiler. Not the thought of replacing the actual image with a rescan.

I can see the ones that I have rescanned though as they are much larger that the default size that has been downloaded. Ones have rescanned sit well over 1000K. Ones that have downloaded from invelos sit about less than 200K.

I was only really targeting on the rescan, ones that sat less or around the 50K mark as I saw the fact that they really didn't have the definition in the picture.

Funny enough "most" of those were originally submitted around 2007 which I suspect people had in their profilers and got resubmitted to invelos as the time of crossover of product. Perhaps original profiler had a different algorithm for picture capture. That information has sort of become part of my requirements as well. That if submitted after 2008 I tended not to touch.
Posted:
Topic Replies: 27, Topic Views: 1272
I had an interesting debate/discussion with some work people over this on Friday.

I was explaining to them how great DVDProfiler was and how I was cataloguing all my DVD's and I showed them my collection on the phone.

A couple of Disks didn't have cover artwork and they asked why not (not ones that I had resubmitted).

Then the whole discussion happened. Which I said I was trying to get a better picture on some of the profiles.

So I explained that I was unhappy with some of my original scans and was trying to update them and that they had been rejected - which meant they weren't really better based on what invelos thought. So what is the criteria for being better? It just has to look better.

It did get me thinking that if I am unhappy with my original submission then ultimately invelos's criteria comes into place when I want to replace it. So then it comes down to individuals idea of what is an upgrade and what isn't. This is based on their ideas of what should be better and not mine.

Anyway this isn't for the debate.. Its more that it shows me that everyone has a different idea of what they are looking for in cover scans.
Posted:
Topic Replies: 27, Topic Views: 1272
Quote:
Every photo editor will do something like that. I use Corel Photo Paint, but more out of being used to it than anything else...
Even the free viewer IrfanView can show it -> Ctrl-H...


Many Thanks (was actually Shift-H)

Quote:
It is your time and you have to be satisfied. ... and even harder to reach: stay satisfied over the time...


I think this is one of things for me as well. Where I look at what I done and how I did it and then go.. geeez I can do that better now as I have got heaps better equipment to do it with. Certainly as I mentioned my criteria for the updates was based on the file size and quality of the actual JPG in the image directory - NOT what was viewing via DVDProfiler.

Anyway thanks for all your input. I have learnt a lot and it will certainly change how I do future new releases. However for scanning part of the back catalog I think I am over that now
Posted:
Topic Replies: 27, Topic Views: 1272
Thanks again AiAustria - just loving the info.

Really just shows how much thought I hadn't put into the whole thing.

What program are you using to display the histogram info for the image?

I suppose the bigger question is as well. Is the new update to my previously scanned image that was accepted a worthwhile update?

If the answer is yes - then great. But I suppose if the answer is no then I really need to look at my criteria for taking the trouble to re-scan the images. At least for the Star Wars one then the added disk ID's should be accepted as I forgot them on my original submission 10 years ago. The Star Wars one was a little harder as the Yoda component is a added gloss sticker (or something) placed on the cover to enhance yoda.
Posted:
Topic Replies: 27, Topic Views: 1272
In the quest for knowledge..

I have reset the entire scanner program back to defaults and removed any type of filtering going on with the raw scan process.

The new scan is slightly lighter than the old one. See what you think. I have resubmitted a the new updated version

http://www.invelos.com/Forums.aspx?task=viewtopic&topicID=112585&PageNum=LAST
Posted:
Topic Replies: 27, Topic Views: 1272
Hi,

Strangely enough I didn't do any contrast changes at all in the image. Other than the resize nothing else was changed with the image from the raw scan to the page. It must be something that the scanner program is doing as part of the scan.

Will take a look.
Posted:
Topic Replies: 27, Topic Views: 1272
Ok Guys,

Resubmitted below that was originally declined. Lets see how we go. Took Rdodolak suggestion and resized it back to 500x700 outside of dvdprofiler so that it doesn't get compressed. See what you think.

http://www.invelos.com/Forums.aspx?task=viewtopic&topicID=112585&PageNum=LAST
Posted:
Topic Replies: 27, Topic Views: 1272
Hey rdodolak,

Great information to know. Yup mine was still at the default so changed that. Will try that idea with the reducing the image size and resubmitting that way. Will try and see if that makes a difference with the resubmission
Posted:
Topic Replies: 27, Topic Views: 1272
All Thanks for your responses. I inputted one back in with some more detail.

T!M - Agreed but remember as well that when I am looking at the raw images in the directory to see if I am going to actually add anything to the detail of the shot I can see the differences. But certainly (which is why I included both pictures) the comparison shot within the interface you cant see that much. Certainly can within the scan program (that was the first shot). Not sure why my original scans were so bright as well - it must of been the scanner as the image isn't that brightly lit and the colours appear washed out. I suppose it depends on preference. Not that I like the darker shots but its just closer to the original cover. I can certainly brighten them up if that's what people want.

I did notice that out of the 250+ rescans I did that the 20+ declined had no votes whatsoever. So perhaps the overall change in the database comes down to the votes for something that is a visual. I don't think me looking at the actual images in the directory has helped as I have bypassed the actual compression and changes that invelos does within their interface.

However the thought that I had was that we are given an option for Hi-Res within the interface. There is little point in doing that if the shots are going to be the same anyway - whatever option you pick. Either way a 150K+ increase in the actual file size to bring better clarity I would personally prefer.
Posted:
Topic Replies: 27, Topic Views: 1272
Hey Hey,

This was one of them and was only a 40K image. Not the best example but was trying to clear up some previous messes of mine with the strobing around the lettering and the generally bad original scan. I suspect that it just wasn't a massive enough difference to warrant the upgrade

http://www.invelos.com/Forums.aspx?task=viewtopic&topicID=111000&PageNum=LAST



Posted:
Topic Replies: 27, Topic Views: 1272
Well looks like some of my low->high res upgrades didn't make the cut (even if I originally contributed them). Not sure what's going on there. I presume its cos it didn't get any votes at all and makes it an instant decline. Seems a shame considering the time I spent on them. AiAustria should I take a no votes personally

Oh well I get to appreciate them locally at least.
Posted:
Topic Replies: 27, Topic Views: 1272
Hey Rutan,

I feel like I know you as I always see your name on the contributions before me

For sure some of them are very old and pre the move to invelos from the old dvdprofiler system. Even to the point that I had to get some of them out of storage as I have replaced them on Blu-ray/4K. However I think for now I have done the ones that I need to do. Looking at file size now its the harder box sets that need to be done (which I might do eg the old Next Generation/Voyager/Enterprise boxes) Not sure whether I will take the trouble just to stick the box under the scanner or try and take a picture but they are sitting about 30K in file size so they are quite small).

Either way with the old stuff its been an interesting exercise as some of them the profile was wrong and or I have used the incorrect UPC so I have had to move the entire profile to a new one. That's given me an opportunity to clean up about 10 of the old ones I had in my database. With my database approaching 15 years old I am sure that its needed a little bit of a spring clean.

Either way enjoy...
Posted:
Topic Replies: 27, Topic Views: 1272
I have looked at some of the no votes. Some of them have merit and some are just plain silly. Ultimately I am just looking at the kind of quality of the scans and whether they can be improved upon. Certainly for the large percentage of mine I know I can as I know the scanner I was using.

Anyway will chip away at them.
Posted:
Topic Replies: 27, Topic Views: 1272
Hey Merrik,

Thanks for the reply. Yup I noticed the resizing and my numbers were calculated on that. The size I am scanning is about 600KB and hence get resized to about 200KB.. but the less than 50KB ones are really rubbish. However depends on who is looking at this and what kind of screen size they are viewing them on. This makes a lot of difference certainly if they are the same size within the profiler.
Posted:
Topic Replies: 27, Topic Views: 1272
Hey All,

Just a quick query. So I had reason recently that I lost my profiler directory - however had a profile backup so I was sweet. But I had to re-download all the images - still no biggie.

However noticed that after that, there was a very large variety of images in the directory. So here's my thought.

If its a high res as per the rules then the file size would be "around" 100DPI = 200K ??

Some covers I had scanned over 10 years ago were done with a crappy hand scanner and not have the definition that I would be able to get today with my current scanner. I can certainly see when I open them up on the big screen there is no definition in the quality of the text. Mind you this is on a 28' monitor.

Is it worth me rescanning these ones that are well under 50K (as they wouldn't be hi-res - eg 100DPI)??

I have done some but I am starting to think its a waste of time.
Posted:
Topic Replies: 27, Topic Views: 1272
Was very sad to hear this. What a great man and a good body of work. Went and watched an episode of 6 Million and watched the feature with him talking about his character. So happy that at least this is recorded so that we can remember him.
Posted:
Topic Replies: 3, Topic Views: 575
Hey all,

OK I don't think I have come across this before in the last 10 years.. Well at least in AUS. This edition - which I just rescanned the cover for I noticed I had a different disk ID for the actual disk. Presumably they re-issued the disk. Michael added the original disk ID 10 years ago. Any ideas on what to do with the different ID - or just let it go ?
Posted:
Topic Replies: 3, Topic Views: 380
Hey Guys,

It appears that I made a mistake and forgot to change the UPC on my 4K Guardian submission. Also appears to have got approved with the wrong UPC there. How do I get it removed now?

http://www.invelos.com/Forums.aspx?task=viewtopic&topicID=883954&PageNum=LAST

Thanks

Mental note to not do submissions late at night.
Posted:
Topic Replies: 2, Topic Views: 352
Invelos Forums->Posts by wazh Page: 1  Previous   Next