First of all: Thanks…it’s really a great improvement even if it’s only a temporary solution. It makes a huge difference, when you are able to see a pic of the edition (I instantly smiled when I realized that my scans appeared when opening the editions). It’s simply much more satisfying.
It’s a bit strange that there was no announcement…because it’s really a great step forward…
There’s just one thing that should be improved. If the correct OL id has not been added to the bb edition, the algorithm picks the next best match (with the same ISBN I suppose). Unfortunately, this often delivers incorrect cover images.I think the pic only should be added when ISBN and year are identical (for older titles without ISBN maybe publisher and year could be used).
I just believe that it’s better to have no pic instead of a wrong pic.
5 Likes
Same experience, I was also surprised by seeing the images I had uploaded to the OL.
Personally, I think it’s neither a step forward not a step back, it’s more of a step sideways. We’re still completely dependent on the OL for images, and can’t add back cover, spine or front matter, but the edition page looks much nicer. It was a pleasant surprise, but it’s also sad there’s no more progress.
3 Likes
hey @indy133 first of all very happy to see people liked the feature of book cover images ! and thankyou for giving a very meaningful feedback , talking about the implementation it was the very first step to integrate OL images into bb and improve the edition page experience ! we can improve the matching logic of isbn as u said by crosschecking the year and possibly the publisher will look into that to tackle the wrong cover images .. , and also talking about the announcement of the feature can see here @bookbrainz.org on Bluesky also can see the release page of the bb
3 Likes
thanks @blackteadarkmatter for the feedback will look into it to improve it more in future !
2 Likes