Sorry… just a short “bang head on table” post.
Anyone with the Cover-Art userscript may notice something here…
I clicked on each album, opened the original artwork, checked properties in Vivaldi.
SEVEN of these covers are identical. SEVEN of these are sharing what I assume is the Digital Media image.
What is frustrating here is that CD and LPs seem to have different artwork. Different cropping. But that can’t be seen in this wall of clones.
Maybe Radiohead fans are just especially lazy.
Edited to add: I could not leave these like this, so have updated the various LP and CD editions here with Discogian artwork. A surprising lack of real scans in this RG.
One of the (many) problems:
We can’t currently link to an already existing CAA cover.
Or I’m wrong?
This is an example why that is a bad idea. Various people had linked LPs and CDs to what was originally a Digital Image. They are all cropped differently. Out of those Seven, only two actually look like that.
The blue underscore bottom left is the biggest give-away. It is not that big on an LP as the art printing wraps around the edge.
Maybe my eyes are more fussy, but MB images are about identification of the product in hand. An RG image is usually the one for those taggers who need something generic.
Notice the difference we have now:
Especially fourth along, first row. It is a different language! Not just the little details.
It would have been more efficient if they could have linked it instead of duplicating it.
Then we could just unlink.
But here we have physical files cluttering the archive storage forever.
When there are several download albums, it’s a pity to upload date images all over.
What we actually have going on here is an official image is available from many places, and it is uploaded multiple times. What sent me onto this search today was an LP appearing in my Subscribed Edits getting this image yet again - but that editor had sourced it externally. They did not copy CAA. It was the external source that was sharing the same image, claiming it was the LP. I expect this is pretty common.
Yeah, it would be nice if we could properly mark CAA with “these images are wrong”. But as to sharing storage, they would not save too much cost. If they need £50 towards a new hard disk, I’ll bung it in the pot. There are OS options for storage that will do de-duplication at a file level if it really was a serious issue.
But now we are going off tangent - the point is there should never be duplication as all Releases should have their own uniquely scanned artwork MB artwork is supposed to be the actual object as it looks in the real world. Not an image that looks perfect for a tagger.