titandeejay

Post by **bazzah** » Fri Dec 09, 2016 8:38 pm

Post by **sauron** » Fri Dec 09, 2016 9:05 pm

His scans look pretty good

Some of the credits look a little blurry but most of them are good.

Post by **Bunny Dojo** » Fri Dec 09, 2016 9:40 pm

The fronts and backs are scavenged; he adds a white border, creates a custom spine, and occasionally adjusts a logo or title treatment elsewhere.

Of that, the scavenging is inconsistent. On Don't Breathe, for example, the back scan is pretty rough and appears stretched.

Check out Suicide Squad's spine. These look like covers for a non-designer's pirated movies, rather than someone carefully and/or joyfully in the process of learning.

And, half of the stuff was only added today.

With that said, a couple of the covers are quite popular, so people seem to find this service useful. An upgrade to Contributor would potentially bring access to better materials for creating those spine designs.

Post by **sauron** » Fri Dec 09, 2016 10:34 pm

Bunny Dojo wrote:
QUOTE (Bunny Dojo @ Dec 9 2016, 10:40 PM) <{POST_SNAPBACK}>
The fronts and backs are scavenged; he adds a white border, creates a custom spine, and occasionally adjusts a logo or title treatment elsewhere.

Of that, the scavenging is inconsistent. On Don't Breathe, for example, the back scan is pretty rough and appears stretched.

Check out Suicide Squad's spine. These look like covers for a non-designer's pirated movies, rather than someone carefully and/or joyfully in the process of learning.

And, half of the stuff was only added today.

With that said, a couple of the covers are quite popular, so people seem to find this service useful. An upgrade to Contributor would potentially bring access to better materials for creating those spine designs.

Good eye Bunny

Post by **Jazzy** » Sat Dec 10, 2016 4:23 am

... he's a member since June 2013.

Found the way to have only one post and for Contributor access.

IP is from Santiago de Chili.... and is 99.9% spanish.

I do not beleive that he did all of those scans but I accepted them because we have members that are looking for scanned covers and they looked decent.

Let's go for it but keep a tracking on his downloads....

Post by **ctaulbee** » Sat Dec 10, 2016 5:26 am

FYI, he uses a few different names on different sites, my opinion is he will not contribute beyond the bare minimum needed to gain download access, that has been his MO for years now.

On one site he has contributed less than 17 "scans" and has downloaded near 400 covers, so you see the plan will be the same here.

He is not scanning them, he like many are grabbing the large front and back digital images off blu-ray.com or other sites like them and using those to piece together covers that look like scans, in many cases they are pretty good actually but the sizes vary which is why some look blurry, they have been sized up due them being a little too small...

On his favorite site where he uploads the most, he has a total of 27 of these uploaded in the last 3 years and one forum post, so I'd not expect much from him beyond a lot of downloading once he is approved.

Personally if the rules were not what they are I'd vote no but since that would be unfair based on the guidelines, I'll just abstain from voting at all.

Post by **bazzah** » Sat Dec 10, 2016 11:49 am

Maybe we should consider amending the rules for new contributors? I.e they must contribute more regularly for the first few months, to prove that they will be good contributors to the site. I wonder if the contributor code could be amended to reflect this?

The rules state that he is eligible for promotion. And if there is no hard evidence that he hasn't done the 'work' himself, I cannot see any reason to not promote him.

Post by **ctaulbee** » Sat Dec 10, 2016 12:10 pm

I don't disagree that under the current guidelines he is eligible.

I also don't think showing up and adding a few (minimal effort) items to get approved then being setup as a unlimited downloader for months before getting downgraded if they never post again, helps the site much.

The contributor code as it is is fine, IF we only allow in those that seem to be in the right mode to begin with, therefore there needs to be more ways to disqualify undesirables, ie that the prerequisites for being considered for contributor status need to be more restrictive and defined better.

Not to say you can't leave latitude for doing it how everyone feels is in the best interest of the site, just that there needs to be some room to deny based on additional points "other" than having not added that minimum number to the gallery, that's just too easy and open for exploitation in my opinion.

Nightrider · Post by **Nightrider** » Sun Dec 11, 2016 8:28 am

Interesting and informative comments gents

Post by **Fidi** » Sun Dec 11, 2016 10:42 am

Voted no.

Following Curt's post it's obvious where this is going to end.
And I really agree with his arguments. He made a very good point in my opinion!

HiResCovers.net

titandeejay

Who is online