Additional Accesses for CC's

In my case, no more possibility to add Front cover!

Olivier, I just checked a release that had no Front cover and I don't seem to have access to adding that one either.

Bummin' Around

Hopefully the new Ticket #3159 will be all encompassing on adding missing Visuals.

OK Mark, wait and see…

If CCs can or will be able to soon add missing cover art, I'm now starting to feel like a dog that finally caught a car. I have suggested this authority from the beginning; now I'm getting a bit gun shy.

It's my understanding that the rules regarding cover art are rather strict, for example has to be the art for the exact release on site (e.g. stereo vs. mono, album vs. cassette, U.S. release vs. European). There's also quality and cropping standards and expectations. I can't speak for others, but I'd really like the guidelines area of the site to be readily available for CCs. I'm thinking of a tab that appears at the top when one is logged in as an editor or CC.

On a related note, my position is some cover art is better then none and poor quality art is better than none. If the original cassette cover art is unavailable but the art from some CD re-release is, I'd rather use the later with a comment than leave blank.

Bastien submitted Ticket #3159...That will allow CCs to upload the attachments we use for B-sides/ Back covers/ Side 1 & 2 scans.....Currently that's not available if a release is "managed" by an Editor, which obviously most all are. Supposedly the vote to allow CCs to add "Primary Release Image" (e.g., A-side or Front Album cover) was already approved it just didn't consider the rest of the artwork.

Yes, the guidelines are strict (and should be) for the what I call the Primary Release Image, but the supporting attachments for the b-sides/back covers.....don't have to adhere to those strict guidelines so it should be more reason to allow access to that.

Quote from VirileVagabond

It's my understanding that the rules regarding cover art are rather strict, for example has to be the art for the exact release on site.... There's also quality and cropping standards and expectations...

On a related note, my position is some cover art is better then none and poor quality art is better than none. If the original cassette cover art is unavailable but the art from some CD re-release is, I'd rather use the later with a comment than leave blank.

Yes, front artworks (to be) added, rightly so, have to represent the releases on site, which, again, have to be the original/1st ones. This also because many releases in 'secondary' countries are not only issued using different artworks, but partly also by other labels and/or companies - and a database should always be as exact as possible.

AFAIK, every editor endevours to stick to the above. Many (me too), also refrain from adding front artworks if they show prominently placed logos of other labels and completely different cat. nos. than the original ones.

In those respects, some artwork surely isn't better than none. Personally, I wouldn't be too picky about the quality, though, as long as the pic matches the right one.

Quote from mduval32323

Bastien submitted Ticket #3159...That will allow CCs to upload the attachments we use for B-sides/ Back covers/ Side 1 & 2 scans.....

Yes, the guidelines are strict (and should be) for the what I call the Primary Release Image, but the supporting attachments for the b-sides/back covers.....don't have to adhere to those strict guidelines so it should be more reason to allow access to that.

Attachments (only) fulfilling the purpose of internal use/evidence,

a) I see no big probs in adding such, as long as tracklists and song credits mirror the 'primary release'. If taken form alternative releases, this needs an according comment in the editor notes, though,

and b) graphical format, quality etc.requirements should remain the way they are.

Erik, thx for interjecting but as I have said many times. The release image "guidelines" apply to the Primary release image (which we've already decided to let CCs alter), not to non-mandatory attachments for B-sides, Back Covers, Side 1/2 vinyl scans - which too many literally decide are non-mandatory. There are no "cropping" stds for those, so if it's okay for a CC to add a Front cover to a release I forgot to add, then by default the secondary visuals that have no cropping rules should just be part of the "understood" rights. And let's be honest, I would get critiqued non-stop if I added a release for a 45 or 78 from Discogs that didn't have the white background around the label yet Full Editors do it every day and no one says a peep (heck I've even gone and created them on Pixel Editor and loaded them back on Discogs and sent error reports and asked people to upload them and they still chose not to). I think it's time to allow some fastidious junior people the ability to make modifications. We have a lot of folks more concerned with hitting submit on an entry. That's all that the "scoring" system seems to care about. I'm just trying to figure out a way to enhance what we already have on the site. I can't control if someone chooses not to add supporting images, and it's not my business, but I would like CCs or Jr Editors or whatever the title of the day is to be able to add them as it's difficult to substantiate what we have entered without them.

Last edit: 2020-01-09 02:45:23 UTC by mduval32323

When I'm trying to add say a 70's or 80s country performance I usually jump for joy when the Release isn't on the site because I know I can set it up with the proper artwork and such. It's lunacy. Clearly I'd rather just add a performance to an existing release but I typically encounter so many deficient submissions that I truly do typically prefer just having to set them up. It shouldn't be that way. No one in their right mind wants to do all that extra work. The answer is just to allow more people to fix the deficient submissions. Clearly as the site has evolved we've "fine tuned" our standards (at least for new prospects) but we have a lot of legacy submissions that are sub-optimal.

Mark, as you see, I'm mainly up your road...

As long as any changes are included in the daily reports = offering the possiblility to double-check and correct etc. (which I forgot to say above), I don't really care if CCs or editors alter 'my' entries (which I out of experience don't want 'regular users' to do; 50 % of the clips don't apply and many Spotify links don't, either, etc.) - but for those entitled to do so, there should be equal preconditions.

So Erik, when you say this:

a) I see no big probs in adding such, as long as tracklists and song credits mirror the 'primary release'. If taken form alternative releases, this needs an according comment in the editor notes, though

You do know that really means you aren't aiding the cause. Every time someone expresses these one off caveats then it just means Bastien loses interest. I hear you here, but if it was okay to all of a sudden let CCs add "Primary Release Images" you can't be raising these one-off exceptions with adding the Back Cover. Clearly Bastien's 10 votes drive what gets sponsored so when he sees disputation then he moves on. The real problem is Full Editors can add missing attachments, but they are also the ones who typically "manage" a release without them. No one wants to bother with this, they are working on their next submission. So my point is why not let CCs "bother with this" if they are so inclined to add support.

Last edit: 2020-01-09 04:05:13 UTC by mduval32323

Daily edits..You get that report now. I'm sure any release you "manage" will be reported on. What is it you want to see? You had no back cover and I added a back cover and you want to review it to make sure you like it when you didn't care if there was one before but now all of a sudden you do? (I'm just using you as the Editor example here not implying anything). Bastien is the boss and I've encountered beaucoup bad primary images or missing support. It's just a fact of life, not picking on any Editor - our standards have evolved.

Again, I'm trying not to have anything impact the need for adding visuals to SHS. I honestly can't fathom how anyone could possibly be "butt hurt" over someone adding a missing back cover or vinyl scan to their "release". If i were some high volume editor I would welcome someone filling in some hole on some visual attachments that supported a release. Aren't we all the SHS team?

If you saw people modifying videos or whatever and they had no clue what they were doing I would hope SHS would have an avenue for stifling that immediately. Because it for sure could and will happen. One would think you could just notify Bastien and he could suspend their privileges. Again, I don't want the "worst case" scenario driving our thinking our nothing will evolve.

And Erik, you are an Editor, if someone modifies a release of yours and it triggers your review of it and you opt to enhance what they have done, isn't that a WIN for SHS? It caused you to review and edit a deficient submission and emend it - which you would never have ever considered prior to that. This is healthy and propels us forward. We need to evolve to less turf as SHS grows. I mean no disrespect but I think I'm as qualified to alter an entry of yours or any Editor on SHS as you or they are. Why would SHS allow me to submit if I weren't? I would say that to Bastien or anyone. I know when I don't know the answer and reach out, but when it comes to adding visuals and such does one need a "Title" to be able to do that.

Last edit: 2020-01-09 04:26:35 UTC by mduval32323

Mark, you should know by now that I don't doubt your expertise... All I'm saying is that I'd generally like to be informed about changes and additions and so be given an option to double check.

Quote from Oliver One

Quote from Bastien

Quote from Oliver One

I seen just now: IMMub isn't authorized like external link?

Come again?

No changes…

It would be good to add Rate Your Music to the list of sources that can be added as well using the CC shortcut.

Quote from sebcat

It would be good to add Rate Your Music to the list of sources that can be added as well using the CC shortcut.

It would probably be better to generally consider RYM a source only on a limited case-to-case basis being really helpful but mainly not providing sufficient detailed back up data

Quote from camembert electrique

Quote from sebcat

It would be good to add Rate Your Music to the list of sources that can be added as well using the CC shortcut.

It would probably be better to generally consider RYM a source only on a limited case-to-case basis being really helpful but mainly not providing sufficient detailed back up data

RYM is an interesting addition in our work, but very often not reliable and I do agree with Erik Berlin.

For anything Bluegrass related, Bluegrass Discography is the go to site. I would recommend that be added as a valid source as well. It typically has what Discogs and Praguefrank have combined.

Quote from mduval32323

For anything Bluegrass related, Bluegrass Discography is the go to site. I would recommend that be added as a valid source as well. It typically has what Discogs and Praguefrank have combined.

Is this https://bibliolore.org/2012/01/19/bluegrass-discography/ the site you want to refer to? If not, please post the applying link... Thanks!