REQUEST- two retail SNES covers

[segamer]

Hopefully this Musya cover is better than that low resolution cover you were referred too. You've gotten all your requested covers, right?

[genocyber]

Indeed. Thanks for helping me.
I'm sure I'll be in need of something else eventually. But for now I'm good.

[Arseen]

Awesome! I hope these all get added to the main site

I don't decide but I can still tell no:
- Wrong SNS code
- Wrong BAR code? (didn't check so not sure)

Fix those and there is slight chance.

[shenske]

Awesome! I hope these all get added to the main site

I don't decide but I can still tell no:
- Wrong SNS code
- Wrong BAR code? (didn't check so not sure)

Fix those and there is slight chance.

Even if those were fixed they unfortunately would not make the site. The front artwork used in both are sub 300dpi images stretched to fit. 

[segamer]

Awesome! I hope these all get added to the main site

I don't decide but I can still tell no:
- Wrong SNS code
- Wrong BAR code? (didn't check so not sure)

Fix those and there is slight chance.

The policies of the site are somewhat unusual in that the main data base is riddled with work like this:

http://www.thecoverproject.net/view.php?game_id=1906
where the bar code has a zonesega water mark and artwork resolution is low, low, low...
As opposed to using this artwork because they find some fault with it..

(Look, his finger is blurry where you fixed it. Sorry, we can't use it!)

The site is missing hundreds upon hundred of covers but they'd rather update with a few covers a month (that meet their new standard) then to use the covers from the users that keep this site alive. Arseen keeps track of all these rejected covers in a forum post. The work is beautiful but for some reason or another, the site doesn't want to use them but they are getting downloaded anyway.

What I can say is that the users of the site create beautiful work (Some users create poor cover work too). It's sad that I have to book mark forum threads in order to find and keep track of the real cover work and creativity of the site. It's a wonderful site but it lacks the true up keep and logic that it needs. I visit the site on a regular basis (I joined in August). It's become apparent to me that snowcone doesn't have time for the site, nor does he really care. Arseen seems to be the only person that does care (as I see him helping those visiting and other members on a daily basis). It's my opinion that snowcone should just give the site to Arseen.

I do try to keep my opinions to myself. The first time I questioned the state of the site, I was attacked at every end (some of the wonderful comments included that i was an idiot troll and my work sucked). Knowing that I, myself, have downloaded hundreds of cover I do my best to give back to the community.

[segamer]

Awesome! I hope these all get added to the main site

I don't decide but I can still tell no:
- Wrong SNS code
- Wrong BAR code? (didn't check so not sure)

Fix those and there is slight chance.

Even if those were fixed they unfortunately would not make the site. The front artwork used in both are sub 300dpi images stretched to fit.  

Not true. I don't stretch my images. None of my images are skewed as i take pride in my work. The Musya logo and background were drawn from the ground up. I have a pains taking process of upscaling, my images (as high resolution scans aren't available)... much of it has been re-drawn (at 300 dpi). There's no reason to believe any of my artwork is stretched to fit (you must be blind). That's actually offensive. The earlier comments about the Power Rangers cover stemmed from my refusal to stretch time image to make it fit in a smaller, compressed area. However, these are usually the type of excuses I hear.

[shenske]

Not true. I don't stretch my images. None of my images are skewed as i take pride in my work. The Musya logo and background were drawn from the ground up. I have a pains taking process of upscaling, my images (as high resolution scans aren't available)... much of it has been re-drawn (at 300 dpi).

   The image that djshock originally used for his Power Ranger Fighting edition (same one you used) has been stretched and is not suitable for the site.  He even linked the original image and its way too small.
Your logo and background on the Musya cover are just fine ... the character on the front looks pretty muddy. Where did you get the images of the guy on the front? Perhaps it was already scaled before you put in your cover?

There's no reason to believe any of my artwork is stretched to fit (you must be blind). That's actually offensive. The earlier comments about the Power Rangers cover stemmed from my refusal to stretch time image to make it fit in a smaller, compressed area. However, these are usually the type of excuses I hear.

Uhh .... what the hell are you talking about? I NEVER told you to stretch the front image on the PR cover ... i told you to shift it (as in move it down further).

I'm just trying to help, take that as you want.   

[segamer]

I think the djshock Power Rangers image was 200 dpi. I upscaled it to 600 dpi, added some filters and then brought it back down to 300 dpi. It should be printable with no noticeable change to the resolution. I've only posted it a day ago and it's already been downloaded close to a hundred times. Most of my work (and the work of others on this site) are getting downloaded regardless of the site politics or standards.

If I were trying to make a point, it's that people, like this new user, want this work regardless of the site standards. That ugly Fatal Fury cover for Genesis was downloaded 600 times. Obviously not everyone shares the same standards. If the site is willing to keep this art work up, why is it unwilling to use some of the work generated by the users of this site.

I don't mind a cover critique if it's for a reason. However, my reaction is due to the fact that my work isn't going to be used by the site anyway. Stretched may have been the wrong word to use.  Typically, a stretch is when you use a free transform in photoshop without upscaling the image causing a pixeled image. What i do is upscale but I fix the results. I'm not just taking low resolution images and using them. I'm actually doing something to improve them. It's not perfect. So, please understand that for someone like myself to spend hours fixing the resolution of an image, it is offensive for someone like yourself to say, " we won't use your cover because you stretched the images."  It's a friken lot of work sometimes. Often, I have to use 3 filters plus a layer mask and lots touch ups. You should be able to zoom and zoom and zoom on that power rangers cover without seeing pixels.



I used this image:

To create this cover:


You'd probably be pretty hard pressed to figure out that i had upscaled the image if I hadn't told you.

[shenske]

I think the djshock Power Rangers image was 200 dpi. I upscaled it to 600 dpi, added some filters and then brought it back down to 300 dpi. It should be printable with no noticeable change to the resolution. I've only posted it a day ago and it's already been downloaded close to a hundred times. Most of my work (and the work of others on this site) are getting downloaded regardless of the site politics or standards.

If I were trying to make a point, it's that people, like this new user, want this work regardless of the site standards. That ugly Fatal Fury cover for Genesis was downloaded 600 times. Obviously not everyone shares the same standards. If the site is willing to keep this art work up, why is it unwilling to use some of the work generated by the users of this site.

[/color]

Thats great, i'm glad your covers are getting attention and are being used.  Many covers that are below our standards still look ok when printed out.  We have our high standards for a reason. We want the highest quality and most consistent covers on the net, not the most covers on the net.  That title belongs to vgboxart. We prefer that quality over quantity approach.

We actually don't have the ability to remove covers from the database. Only replace them. when we get a cover that meets our standards we will replace that cover.  Our standards years ago were not as strict as they are now. Some of the older covers do not meet our current standards and we will be glad to replace them when a suitable replacement comes along.

I don't mind a cover critique if it's for a reason. However, my reaction is due to the fact that my work isn't going to be used by the site anyway. Stretched may have been the wrong word to use.  Typically, a stretch is when you use a free transform in photoshop without upscaling the image causing a pixeled image. What i do is upscale but I fix the results. I'm not just taking low resolution images and using them. I'm actually doing something to improve them. It's not perfect. So, please understand that for someone like myself to spend hours fixing the resolution of an image, it is offensive for someone like yourself to say, " we won't use your cover because you stretched the images."  It's a friken lot of work sometimes. Often, I have to use 3 filters plus a layer mask and lots touch ups. You should be able to zoom and zoom and zoom on that power rangers cover without seeing pixels.

I honestly meant no offense.  I made that vertical SNES template and i included a readme file w/ the template for a reason.  I have a specific set of rules for using the template so all of the covers are consistent across the board.  

I understand your process takes  along time and the finished product may look far better than what you started off with but if the finished product doesn't meet our standards we have to decline it regardless of the amount of work that went into it. Upscaling works great on monochromatic logos but doesn't always doesn't always work that well on images.

You'd probably be pretty hard pressed to figure out that i had upscaled the image if I hadn't told you.

I downloaded you cover and found this the moment i zoomed in.  See the little stray pixels. Even when you apply some filter a few of these little guys will pop up.  They are artifacts from a low quality image.  Not only the pixels but do you see how all the fur isn't distinctively separated. The original image when blown up wouldn't have looked so muddy and have been a little smoother.


It may seem nitpicky but its what it is  


EDIT:  To be honest, i'm far too busy to be arguing about this. Best of luck with your covers. I won't be talking any more about this topic. 

[segamer]

Your standards are beyond reality and it's odd that these standards only apply to others as your own covers are imperfect. The truth is, original Genesis, NES, SNES and other weren't printed at 300 dpi back in the 80's and 90's. That's why when you scan an old box at 300dpi, you can see the color cells. When you print some of these substandard covers, you can't see these flaws unless you put them under a microscope. Aside from the fact that thousands of covers that are made available on this site don't meet your own standard, I can show you plenty of flaws with the newer covers that have been posted based on how nitpicky you. Should I do so?

Go and print one of the Wolfchild boxes and try to find these same pixels you're complaining about. The sites own templetes suffer from the same complains you've made over my cover work. Look at the resolution and color discrepancies. I don't think anyone cares that about these imperfections. However, you seem so concerned over imperfections under a microscope... I'm surprised you aren't complaining about the sites templates. Should I show you more imperfections? There's plenty.






Forgotten Worlds Scan at 300 dpi


text scan zoom



Close up on characters face

[Arseen]

Actually I have been nagging about the SNES template once in a while.

And I'm using updated template that has some bits better, see: Super Tetris 3:

Super Tetris 3

[shenske]

I'm sorry you have an outdated version of the template. Try redownloading from our templates page 

[segamer]

I just joined a two months ago. I've only downloaded the template recently. I would imaging most of the work posted on this site is with the outdated template.  Why aren't you complaining? If the tetris 3 templete is the newer template. The imperfections I just pointed out are still there, with the exception of the seal of quality. The entire back is... um.... stretched and low rez. Below your standard.

[segamer]

The NES Section Z cover that was posted on October 29th, 2012



OMG, the resolution is lower than the Wolfchild cover I posted but for some reason it's acceptable. Can someone say hypocrisy! The thing that is shocking is I didn't zoom in that much. The zoom you did on Wolfchild is far greater.



How embarrassing. Judging... Complaining about others work... ...for not meeting an imaginary standard.


OMG, such a substandard resolution. It's so much lower than the covers I just posted.

Pride comes before a fall...

[BadChad]

Im going to have to disagree with you on the NES cover, and agree with what shenske pointed out about your Wolfchild cover. He knows what hes talking about. I was actually the one who approved that Section Z cover and theres nothing wrong with its quality. Sure any cover will look pixelated if you zoom in enough but I dont think thats the point. Moire effect cant usually be completely repaired without washing out the details of the artwork or bringing down the overall sharpness and quality. Like shenske pointed out, theres no detail left in the fur of the wolf because its been washed out which was probably because the original art source wasnt the greatest to begin with. BTW, mobygames is NEVER a suitable site for artwork worthy of our standards...

Just comparing your wolfchild cover to our SNES wolfchild cover can show the difference, and to be honest even our SNES cover could use a few minor tweaks which would improve the overall quality.

GEN/SNES:


Looking at the two makes it clear to see the difference in detail and personally, the one on the right looks better to me.

Sure it can be upsetting when your cover gets turned down, but your cover was turned down for quality reasons and its not like thats something we just do around here for fun. We want covers that meet our standards so there will be no need to update them in the future. Sure we have plenty of old covers that could use updating and it seems like everybody who gets offended by our standards, runs straight for that boat (I did once when I was new around here). Things have changed over the years and quality standards have improved and theres nothing wrong with that. And personally, Im happy for that because it pushed me to make better quality work and now Im a cover admin whos made plenty of high quality covers for everyone to enjoy. If your cover doesnt meet our standards but is still useful to others, theres nothing stopping them from enjoying it from the link you posted.