ORIGINAL FRONT COVER

NEW FRONT COVER


ORIGINAL REAR COVER

NEW REAR COVER


The vote was Yes: 1  No: 0

Don't see any obvious reason it would be declined.  I assume it was a mistake by the screener?  Or am I missing something?

The new front cover picture seems to be missing a part on the right side. It is cut right after the E in "SPECTRE" so the number "12" is gone.

Can't see anything wrong with it.  What is Laff1 talking about? Spectre?

Not sure about these (and on the back, i wonder if the original contributor cut it off because that one has no copyright), but in the past month I've had three images declined (and in each instance, no no votes, in fact multiple yeses). On the one (as the two were just declined), I just resubmit with reasoning why they were an improvement.

Quoting The Movieman:

Quote:
Not sure about these (and on the back, i wonder if the original contributor cut it off because that one has no copyright), but in the past month I've had three images declined (and in each instance, no no votes, in fact multiple yeses). On the one (as the two were just declined), I just resubmit with reasoning why they were an improvement.

Thanks, that's what I did.  I usually try and put a comment in why it's better, unless I think it is obvious such as in this case.

Did you explain the changes in the contribution notes? If you didn't (specific enough) that could be a reason for the screeners to decline the contribution.

Quoting AiAustria:

Quote:
From my point of view, the new scans are overcontrasted - ie. on the second photo on the back cover, the mic nearly disapears and the texture around Travolta and his suit is lost completely. - I would have voted no on theese scans...

Remark: in the good old analog times there was a really good rule to limit contrasts between the RGB values 16 and 240 to avoid problems with non calibrated displays. Today this should be a rule of the thumb to keep images natural...

... and for the text on the bottom of the back cover: This seems to be cropped from the original scans - for what reason ever. The aspect ratio of the back cover shows too little height. Maybe it was scanned from a snapper...

Wow, did you just purchase this in the past day?  I find it curious on how you didn't vote on this initial contribution the first time around but this time you did.  What a coincidence!!! 

I also agree on some of your points.  I only submit covers that I think more accurately resemble the actual cover.  Sometimes my scans are over saturated, and while I may prefer them I keep them in my local.  Do you actually have this DVD to compare it to the current and newly contributed scan?  If not then you should not be voting on something you don't own. 

From your 'no' vote :"Sharper and better colouring but overcontrasted: dark areas loose texture, Microphone on the back disappeared..."

Is there some lose of detail on 'some' aspects of the scan?  Perhaps. but the color and contrast are much more accurate than the current cover.  How do I know?  I'm looking at it the actual cover right now.  But what does that matter?