Thanks for reminding me why I stopped uploading album art.

[edjgraphix]

I thought I'd upload the Red Hot Chili Peppers new album cover that I got from their web site just to see if I still remembered how to use Musicbrainz and Fanart. So I downloaded the picture and had to reduce the size from 1500x1500 to 1000x1000 pixels and copied the album number from Musicbrainz and entered it into Fanart - BAM! HEY! IT WORKED! So I uploaded the new Chili Peppers album cover and thought of a bunch of album covers that I could upload next chance I got. Everything seemed fine.

Now today, I see that the image was denied because the quality wasn't high enough. The album just came out and the artwork was reduced in size from the band's website. I guess this moderator has seen better, clearer artwork somewhere. OH YEAH, THAT'S RIGHT! THAT'S WHY I STOPPED UPLOADING ALBUM COVERS! Because some of these moderators have ridiculous expectations. A couple of the moderators in the past had gone specifically through the artwork that I had uploaded and had once been approved, and they would deny 20 to 30 of them at a time. I had this happen a bunch of days in a row before I finally had enough of wasting my time. I started out doing this for my ipod and itunes and thought it was cool that others were interested in having nice looking artwork, but then I started noticing that some of the good looking album covers were being removed and replaced by artwork provided by some of the moderators. I've had artwork that was deliberately meant to look pixelated denied because whatever moderator at the time didn't believe that it was supposed to look like that. I don't mind if my artwork is removed, as long as it is replaced by something that looks better. There are some moderators who do a great job here. In fact, I had some Corrosion of Conformity artwork that looked great, and one day I saw that 3 or 4 of my submissions were replaced, and I was thinking it was going to be the same bs that was becoming a regular theme, but I was surprised by the nicest looking album covers that I could imagine. That was one time out of many many times that made perfect sense. I'm not saying that all of the artwork I have submitted has been perfect or anything, but why would artwork be denied and left with no submission?

I deal with album artwork every single day. It's not just a hobby for me, I make a living working with album artwork. If this place was serious about building a nice database of album cover artwork you should probably start by taming some of these moderators. If you're going to deny something because the quality isn't high enough - EVEN THOUGH IT CAME DIRECTLY FROM THE BAND'S WEBSITE AND WAS EVEN REDUCED IN SIZE - then be prepared to lose even more contributors, which I'm sure you have.

HAHAHA! I JUST GOT A MESSAGE TELLING ME THAT AN IMAGE I UPLOADED A WHILE BACK NEEDS REPLACING! This is by the same moderator that denied the Chili Peppers submission. This new reason is "Good but could be a bit better" PERFECT! THIS IS WHY I WON'T WASTE MY TIME HERE ANY LONGER. THANKS FOR THE REMINDER.

I used to like this place, now it's just one of the many other album artwork sites that I check for album art.

[togrul788]

Same thing happened to me few times. We are not wizards or managers of the bands. These are the arts we could find by searching for a long time. Our goal is to make them better and better. But no, some mods want those wizardous arts beforehand and it will make uploaders leave the site. Let me give you example.
This art on the site needs replacing, reason is the line on the edge:
https://fanart.tv/fanart/music/8bfac288 ... 84ad57.jpg

I uploaded this one and it got denied:
https://fanart.tv/fanart/music/deny/fre ... 8c0335.jpg

The reason is, it's not high quality. Please compare and see the difference.
So i left it blank, let's see if someone finds better!

[edjgraphix]

Every single piece of artwork should be replaced if something better should come along. But to have nothing instead of something is what had me looking elsewhere for album artwork. This place could be the ultimate site to get the best AVAILABLE artwork of any album cover around, but instead they choose to not include album art because it's not perfect. Why don't they use that same philosophy on their own moderators too? They could be better - are you going to let them all go and have nothing, or would it be reasonable to stop letting them have so much say whether something is allowed or not and just allow any artwork until something better comes along. The dumbest thing to do is to discourage those who help contribute to this site, which is what they are doing by having their high standards of album artwork that don't even really exist in reality. Especially when it comes to the album artwork from the 50's, 60's and 70's - I know this for a fact because I have had more artwork turned down from those eras than anyone could possibly stand. How is someone going to judge album artwork from albums that they have never seen?

I have so much album artwork on my computer that it's a shame that others can't get access to it. I wouldn't waste one more second uploading it here, not with the way these people judge. If something should be corrected, that's fine - I've had that happen on more than a few occasions, but an overall, "no, it could be better" is just like saying, "too bad, you wasted your time." Why waste my time?

[edjgraphix]

IT ALL MAKES PERFECT SENSE NOW!

I spent about a year uploading artwork here and was the all-time leader at one time. I have since dropped down to 3rd on the list.
I have uploaded 2,436 images - or that's how many were accepted.

The person who just sent my last 2 denials is the person who is a moderator at the number 2 position.
Some might consider this a conflict of interest.

Good going there moderator! I hope you make it to #1.
You are a true believer in album artwork - you deserve to be #1!

Only a sucker would continue contributing to a place that allows this kind of behavior.

I wonder what other moderators here think about this?

I also wonder how much longer this will be allowed to be posted here?
If they can remove album artwork they certainly have the ability to remove words that make them look bad.

[Kode]

If it is removed, I will want to know why.

The site is currently going through a rebuild, after which it will be much easier to communicate between ourselves and resolve issues.

Our motto is it's better to have no image than a poor image, however, having said that I agree some moderators appear overzealous, the problem is we are short staffed and there doesn't seem to be anyone taking overall responsibility for anything.

Denial reasons of "Good but could be a bit better" are *not* acceptable.

The new site will allow "edits" which I hope will make things better all round.

Again, I am sorry that you have been discouraged from contributing, I am trying to get the new site done as quickly as possible, I will try to pay more attention to the moderators in future.

[Kode]

Also we have had notices up for months asking for people to help out as Mods, if you feel the current mods aren't doing their job properly, the best response would be to join in and help us out.

[Kode]

I have called a moderator meeting for Saturday: viewtopic.php?f=2&t=5977 feel free to attend and give your thoughts

[ZincRider]

Same thing happened to me few times. We are not wizards or managers of the bands. These are the arts we could find by searching for a long time. Our goal is to make them better and better. But no, some mods want those wizardous arts beforehand and it will make uploaders leave the site. Let me give you example.
This art on the site needs replacing, reason is the line on the edge:
https://fanart.tv/fanart/music/8bfac288 ... 84ad57.jpg

I uploaded this one and it got denied:
https://fanart.tv/fanart/music/deny/fre ... 8c0335.jpg

The reason is, it's not high quality. Please compare and see the difference.
So i left it blank, let's see if someone finds better!

It's sharper, alright, but it still has problems. Can't you see the artefacts around the text? Someone clipped the highlights, resulting in an uneven white surface and then replaced parts of it with pure white.
The original 1500x1500 px version (found it on itunes )also suffers from a bit of moire. Scaled down to 1000x1000 it's not as obvious anymore, but it's still there.

There may be no better version of this on the internet, but you can either try to fix the issues or scan the record sleeve yourself to get a higher quality image.

[edjgraphix]

If it is removed, I will want to know why.

The site is currently going through a rebuild, after which it will be much easier to communicate between ourselves and resolve issues.

Our motto is it's better to have no image than a poor image, however, having said that I agree some moderators appear overzealous, the problem is we are short staffed and there doesn't seem to be anyone taking overall responsibility for anything.

Denial reasons of "Good but could be a bit better" are *not* acceptable.

The new site will allow "edits" which I hope will make things better all round.

Again, I am sorry that you have been discouraged from contributing, I am trying to get the new site done as quickly as possible, I will try to pay more attention to the moderators in future.

Well, I wasn't expecting this kind of response at all. These are reasonable explanations. Thanks.

I think one of the problems is the motto. Not necessarily the words, but what the meaning of "poor" is. I have had many covers denied using this statement as a reason, when the image was not actually poor. It may not have been perfect, or there may have been an area that wasn't as nice as it could be, but should imperfections = poor? Especially on older artwork that is harder to find. A lot of that older artwork won't look great on a computer screen because it was printed using CMYK and many of those colors can't be shown accurately using the monitor's RGB lighting. Good luck finding clear, crisp type on some of those album covers when the dot patterns criss-cross each other to trick your eye into seeing color. There was only 4 colors that were being used. You couldn't print orange, or green, or purple, our brains were tricked into seeing those colors.

I really did think this would be a great site for album covers until this idea of perfection became the norm. Like I said, I do understand the motto that you are using, I just think that the term "poor" was mistakenly applied to everything that wasn't perfect, well, at least with my submissions.

Again, thanks for your response. It's nice to know that this problem can possibly be taken care of.

[Kode]

As I said, you are welcome to attend the meeting on Saturday and provide your thoughts.

As I also said, the new site should hopefully make things a lot easier all round, the proposal I am going to make is when the new site is launched that when an image is submitted, if it has small imperfections then it can still be approved, but the imperfections will be noted against the image, this image can then be fixed by anyone. If it is fixed within 2 weeks then the original uploader is still credited and the second person with be noted as making an edit (and will gain points), after 2 weeks if the image is significantly improved the second person will be credited as the new uploader, if it's just fixing the noted issues then I haven't decided yet whether they just get an edit note or credit.

My preference is that as a site, rather than having just the best possible images, we have the best available images working towards the goal of having the best possible images. But again, this is a decision we will talk about on Saturday.

*edit* To make it clear though, this new proposal will be when the new site is launched, it is way too much work to try that with the current site, so the current rules stay in place now (as inconsistently as they are currently applied =/ ), and the new site is a good 2 - 3 months off, I had been hoping for help getting it ready but none has materialised.