Cover art types for jewel cases

Tags: #<Tag:0x00007fe316eee7a0> #<Tag:0x00007fe316eee480>

A jewel case will typically include a booklet, the front of which is the front of the release, and a back sheet including spines. It is not entirely clear how to map scans of these to the MusicBrainz cover art types.

  1. Should the front image also be marked as booklet? I think it makes sense considering that we use multiple choice types.
  2. Should then the back of the booklet also be marked as back? Probably not. In some cases it’s nearly identical to the other back, though, so it wouldn’t be a stretch to mark it as such.
  3. Most people would probably not scan this, but I like to scan the backside of the back sheet. You could argue for marking it as back along with the actual back side, but that’s probably not a good idea. I usually mark it as other.
  4. Should the back be marked as both back and spine, assuming the entire sheet is scanned? I think so, but it probably isn’t what you would expect from an imaged marked spine.
  5. Any recommendations on order? The how to notes that the order has an impact in some cases. I think a front to back ordering (front of booklet, inside of booklet, back of booklet, innermost side of back sheet, back, medium) makes sense. Maybe the medium should be moved inbetween the booklet and the back sheet.

These are just some thoughts of mine. I think the first question might me the most controversial. If you agree or disagree, please tell me your thoughts!

  1. Yes. It is both the front of the packaging itself and a part of the booklet, and that should be reflected in the cover art types.
  2. No. The back is the back of the release: “The back of the package of an audio recording, this will often contain the track listing, barcode and copyright information.”
  3. The cover art type “Tray” was created for just this purpose.
  4. I usually only use “Back”, but I really should use “Back” + “Spine”.
  5. I usually just start at the front of the package and work my way down. So first the front, then the booklet, then the disc, tray, back etc. It doesn’t really matter though.
8 Likes

My method is to basically enter them in the order they’d be seen as you “experienced” the package:

First you look at the outside so:

  1. front
  2. back + spine
  3. maybe some _sticker_s on the outside.

Then you open it up:
4. medium
5. booklet back side

Then you take the disk out (now you can see the art underneath) and put it in a player, and perhaps read the booklet before/while you listen:
6. tray
7. booklet remaining pages, or other artwork as applicable

6 Likes

I try to order things directly from top to bottom of the release, as that seems quite a consistent and predictable way to do it.
So same as:[quote=“mfmeulenbelt, post:2, topic:141379”]
I usually just start at the front of the package and work my way down. So first the front, then the booklet, then the disc, tray, back etc. It doesn’t really matter though.
[/quote]
‘Extra’ things like inserts, posters and download codes I put at the end though, not where they were in the package.

Would be great if people would use back + spine as that’s totally accurate, and that kind of scan is a bit different to one where the spine has been cropped out.
I always scan the tray, because why not!

5 Likes

Thanks, you’re super helpful!

Necroing this because the people involved will probably have opinions on this: what should be done if the front cover image for a jewel case includes the case itself? (probably most often on images found online, although I can imagine cases where the case itself has some feature that makes it worth uploading). Should we have an extra cover art type for “case” or whatnot, for the times where the plastic case itself is visible in the picture? :slight_smile:

6 Likes

It sounds useful. Are there any other packaging types where this would be relevant?

1 Like

Personally, in the very rare instance of a “Jewel Case” feature I would check Other and add a remark. I’m not adverse to adding another type, just think ‘other’ seems to currently serve the purpose.

3 Likes

This seems related to the “exploded view” of some box sets, e.g. the Beatles box.

If a new category were created, could it make sense to include that sort of thing?

I’d call that “overview”

1 Like

A good example of a tray that is special due to having braille embossed on it. This one is “front, tray”.

And if new types are being added a “matrix” would be useful for those closeups of the inner ring of a CD.

I am also in the middle of uploading a similar confusing one today. In my hands is a jewel case, with a cardboard slipcase cover. This means the normal “front” image is now hidden by an alternate “front”. It is like a single disc boxset.

5 Likes

For lack of anything better, I check ‘other’ and type (Rear of original cardboard sleeve w/spine) in the comment section. Peek at https://musicbrainz.org/release/866529d0-cc46-36b8-ae11-38b985054a1c/cover-art. I would also check ‘tray’ with a comment about the braille embossed on the front, tray. Knowing about the braille is a new wrinkle on my remaining grey cells, thanks.

1 Like

This is a slightly comical example - it could be argued that there are three different potential “fronts” here. :grin:

This is a Remastered Reissue. A cardboard slipcase over a clear jewel case with a big booklet inside.

To me, the REAL front here is the Slipcase as that is what I see on my desk in front of me.

Inside that Slipcase is the “front” of the normal jewel case, showing page one of the booklet.

And inside that booklet, we have an image on Page 3 which is the ORIGINAL cover of the original release. Or “Artist’s intent” of a front.

I see this as a “Boxset” with one item inside. The slipcase is a kind of open ended box with the real product inside. When we get a “Box \ Wrapper” image type it will be handy to better categorise items like this.

2 Likes

I would also support a new type called Box / Wrapper.
And a type for images showing the whole jewel case or what I call a “3D view” of the packaging (provided by some online stores) would be useful too. Maybe this could be called Promotional?
Or both could even be combined as one new type, if someone finds a fitting name.

3 Likes

Agree @kellnerd - a Promo shot would be useful. Especially for those big box set releases that have all kinds of extras in them.

We currently have a Image system built around a simple CD or Vinyl. With a little extra added for those Japanese OBI strips. Would be good to expand to the more unusual packages.

3 Likes

Front vs. Booklet: I’d say no to that. A single frame. A booklet that is serving as the cover by design is still the cover.

Scan the booklet / insert card with at least the back side as some only are a simple square card. Otherwise with it’s content and that cover scan can be part of the booklet, then it’s a booklet.

By putting [X] Booklet on the image is a pretty lame way of finding a way to tick all those boxes. :frowning: and could possibly discourage someone from adding more if they see that ‘Booklet’ is already present. (Yes, I know, people really should actually look closely at stuff. But they don’t always do so.)

I don’t really understand your message but:

  • A usual jewel case release has its booklet cover (page 1) serving as cover, so this scan should be both :white_check_mark: Booklet and :white_check_mark: Front
  • When another edition of this release has a slipcase over the jewel case, the booklet page 1 scan should be just :white_check_mark: Booklet and the slipcase front scan should be just :white_check_mark: Front
5 Likes

I like overview, it’s what I write in the image comment, usually:

2 Likes

Yes. “Front” is ambiguous to me and can mean “cover art” or “case front”. I think the two should be distinguished because they are both sometimes different. To me, cover art should be the equivalent to the “marketed” or most common album artwork associated to a release. The “front” should be the case front of a physical media, although I imagine a lot of the existing data is not uploaded that way.

1 Like

About that type of 3D cover (computer graphics or rendering cover), we got an edit 65776932 with 2 yes and 4 no. Not a long and controversial discussion, but despite this same editor try again with two album one in 65940175 and 65945659. Should be great to have an official status for this :wink:

2 Likes