I believe MusicBrainz can be the premier album artwork resource thanks to the Cover Art Archive project’s hosting, as well as API tools like libcoverart to help with cross-software implentation.
Being a non-profit with archive.org providing artwork legal protection, the artwork on MusicBrainz is likely to stay accessible for the indefinite future, unlike privately controlled and fallible artwork exchanges like fanart.tv and albumartexchange.com.
MusicBrainz has the tools for preserving all artwork of a music release from: the backs of covers, insides of booklets, obi strips, and does not restrict high resolution images meant for 4k displays.
So given its resourcefulness why does MusicBrainz lack the community support for actually getting to use and make beautiful artwork for its music releases?
I propose we:
Have a dedicated cover art scanning sub-forum,
Have cover art more predominantly displayed, meaning BIG, not tucked away under a cover arts tab, but on the overview page of a music release for example.
Personally I have written vinyl art scanning and editing guides for a vinyl forum explaining how to use VueScan to achieve great colour-calibrated scans, scanner model recommendations, how to descreen scans to achieve a superior surface look to artwork.
There are many artwork hobbyists like me but we are relegated to audio-engineering forums and vinyl discussion blogs and host our cleaned up art externally. What we really need is the competence of MusicBrainz and its foundation to help host and preserve our decentralised efforts.
At the very least for us to have a discussion sub-forum here to better make artwork scans for MusicBrainz’ plethora of music release editions.
If necessary I can draft artwork guidelines, wiki entries, and provide my example scanning and artwork cleaning guides. I may be contacted by private message if there is official interest.
And a quick search you’ll find plenty of discussions pop up now and then on the artwork.
Various tickets around are expanding on the types we have - matrix, top and bottom appeared in the last few months.
I think you’ll find there is plenty of focus on art - just watch how fast the new cover ticker moves on the front page. We all have our own methods and tips often get shared.
Your best option is just dive in and start making some threads. Share your methods as people will be interested.
I wouldn’t be opposed to a forum dedicated to cover art scanning/editing. Could be useful for those looking to improve their skills in this area.
I don’t think MB needs to elevate the display of artwork on the site, however. Cover art is a component of the whole, not the focus. The music is the focus, and the artwork is just one of several means of identifying unique releases.
I agree completely. The point of MB’s cover art inclusion is to accurately represent the release. Allowing inaccurate or irrelevant images isn’t “progress” – it’s missing the point. MB releases can be linked to a number of fanart sites via relationships. That’s more than enough.
What if the images are relevant and exact representations of their associated releases… just really well scanned and free of dust, scratches and wrinkles?
You’ll find plenty of people who agree with you and are interested in swapping tips. (There are also lots of people who just want an image for tagging - lets please not bring that debate up and keep that for another thread).
MB’s brilliance is in the little details. You’ll find many editors supplying good quality scans of every part of a release.
I’m one of those artwork addicts. I am archive scanning everything I own for my own use, and in the process uploading this to MB to act as a backup and sharing the resource I have in my hands. Artwork scanning can get addictive.
Could you please put any specific layout suggestions or feedback into the redesign thread? (Just covering artist pages at the moment):
We already have a lot of people here who are focused on excellent scans and cover art
You are welcome to join us! And start threads pulling it all together! @Freso, what do you think about a new cover art section?
As you can tell the friction that exists between cover art uploaders is MBs need for release-specific cover art, vs people who want to edit or ‘fix’ artwork (beyond removing dust or scratches - cropping, removing logos, and so on, is not allowed). For instance, if you want to upload a digital cover you have to add the digital release to MB.
But this isn’t a deal breaker for all cover art lovers, I see it as a big positive. Join us
@highstrung : So you say that “descreen scans to achieve a superior surface look to artwork” and/or “our cleaned up art” and/or “free of dust, scratches and wrinkles” belongs not to
Fan Art
Any fan-made or edited artwork is not to be uploaded to any release, with the exception of bootleg releases …
This includes any form of alteration to the positioning of graphical elements within the image (such as advisory, hype or point of sale stickers).
Yes, as I interpret the guideline, processing for the purpose of more accurately representing the physical release is fine. I think that’s consistent with common practice and with previous forum discussions.
‘Superior surface look’ and a few other points are a bit vague on what exactly they are changing, but generally speaking they sound all good.
For instance removing pixelation introduced by a scanning process = yes. Removing pixelation that’s present on the printed release = better to link it via fanart.tv
Edit: maybe pixelation wasn’t the best example to use, there’s a related unresolved (afaik?) question re if we can minimize/edit print dots, if anyone wants to talk about that maybe start a new thread.
highstrung and aerozol get what I mean. We’re committed to producing really good scans of album art without changing the positioning of graphics for that particular release (exactly what the fan art rules say). If the cover scans with moire we try to flatten this moire because the scanning was too precise. Would be like using a microscope to take a picture.
I’ll produce an example wiki which matches the rules in due time and write a new thread proposing exactly the purpose of a new sub-forum. aerzol already has a redesign thread so I am contributing to that for my second “cover art more predominantly displayed” point.
A bit late to reply (sorry), but wanted to take a look at some stuff first, and…
Most months see 2–3 topics in MusicBrainz with the cover-art tag. I’m not sure that’s quite enough to warrant a new (sub)category for it or that that would provide any benefit which the tag does not already provide.
What would you all want from a separate category that a tag cannot provide? (Or that you think a tag doesn’t provide.)
I think it’s a chicken and egg situation, where if we make a cover art forum section more prominent it might encourage people to join in who are just interested in cover art. Tags are a bit buried and more of a advanced browsing function.
I’m thinking that cover art is a good avenue into MB for a new subset of contributors who aren’t necessarily into the other ‘data’.
That said, there’s no guarantee there would end up being more discussion. I don’t think it’s a must-have. But a potential opportunity.
