Re: [mb-users] cover art source

tommycrock wrote
> Okay, you've prompted me lixobix
> 
> I've been thinking it would be useful to have a flag or two to declare
> cover art as scanned or 'original digital' (or some better words than
> these/other choices). For physical releases scans are one of the best ways
> of knowing you've got the exact same release in your hands. But scans
> often
> aren't the best cover art, due to the losses in printing and scanning and
> resulting moire, poor colour reproduction, never mind dog-eared corners
> etc.
> It seems to me that when original digital artwork is available that
> closely
> matches the real item, but maybe a different shape (e.g. square instead of
> rectangular) or lacks some release specific identifiers (it's a generic
> version ready to be filled with barcode/label/catno etc.) we should add it
> for use as cover art but flag it as a digital version, or otherwise have a
> way people can see the type of artwork they want.
> 
> _______________________________________________
> MusicBrainz-users mailing list

> [email protected]

> http://lists.musicbrainz.org/mailman/listinfo/musicbrainz-users

Interesting idea. But might that not result in releases having two complete
sets of cover art? Could be a bit confusing. Also, how would we ensure that
only the desired cover art is downloaded by Picard?



--
View this message in context: http://musicbrainz.1054305.n4.nabble.com/cover-art-source-tp4668328p4668453.html
Sent from the MusicBrainz - Users mailing list archive at Nabble.com.