Determining release packaging based on Amazon cover art

Tags: #<Tag:0x00007fe30ef5da40> #<Tag:0x00007fe30ef5d978> #<Tag:0x00007fe30ef5d8b0>

I have not read everything there yet but just one thing:
You generally cannot determine package type from Amazon images. Their images are most of the time mere concept arts, rather than actual picture of this very edition.


Gets even worse if you are looking at older second hand CDs - Ebay gets more reliable in that case! At least you know the seller has a camera! I’ve seen some very weird images on Amazon attached to releases. It is usually my “last choice” reference.

In this example I am not sure what that Amazon link shows. All I could work out was it was a CD for sale. Nothing describes the packaging. And the site in the example shows “import” - so not even first hand data. I would not trust much at all on there for this example.

Shapes of images certainly mean very little on Amazon.

With data discrepancies like this I use Discogs as a more reliable source than Amazon. Also Checking through Wikipedia too for dates. Amazon is a shop, and the second hand side sells any old tatt. I’ve also seen images for the “same” ASIN show different images in different countries.

Discogs is not perfect, but there is another group of people over there arguing over those tiny small details. This leads to a fairly decent checking system.

(And in this specific example I think Amazon probably lifted their art from Discogs anyway…)

1 Like

Here is a good example of why to never trust Amazon links found with MB releases:

It is a nine year old conversation, but does go to show that not everyone cares. There is an example of a user there who just whacked in any old ASIN links just to get a pretty picture. He doesn’t even care that there is a different number of tracks on the Amazon page.

It is a good example of how some people will add Amazon links purely to make sure their copy of Picard then picks up an image.


That was the last resort to determine the particular edition in the absence of other information about the physical source. If it matches the layout of jewel case (and there are no other sources to check) then it is jewel case. And I stand by this.

Are you meaning single front covers here? Because all too often I can see back covers on Amazon which represent particular and different editions. Those are not concept arts. Why should one consider the accompanying front covers not real?

Moreover, how do you know exactly that a single front cover is “concept art” when release comes in jewel case?

Then one should never trust any attached link either. Or any other piece of information entered. It is the question of trust in diligence of other editors. There’s nothing specific to Amazon links here. To be honest, I don’t understand what is the use of your remark.