Quick question: Does filmogs require users to post their own photos or get permission first to post an image, say, from an online retail site?

Images from external sites are not allowed and should be user contributed from the item in front of them.

In the following thread at Comicogs, staff member NessFan lays it out by saying

http://www.comicogs.com/forum/1115-A-growing-concern-of-some-images-here

"From the guidelines: "Images should be good quality, face-on, readable, correctly oriented and free of any copyright, watermark, URL, or other marks. Images should be static, no animated GIFs please. They must be of the exact object they are attached to. (13.1.4.)

Copyrighted or illegal images will be removed, and the user may be held accountable for their inclusion. (13.1.7.)"

Please ensure that the images uploaded to Comicogs follow the image guidelines. If anyone is looking to use images from other sites, always be sure to understand that site's copyright rules. If their website's images are protected under a copyright, then sharing them with Comicogs would be in violation of that website's copyright and our own image guidelines. I hope that makes sense. Happy submitting, everyone!"

"As it says in our guidelines, "Copyrighted or illegal images will be removed, and the user may be held accountable for their inclusion. (13.1.7.)""

Also, although i have only seen this on a few rare occasions, sometimes the uploaded image has been altered from the original.

It has crossed my mind in the past to add information of releases from "covers" websites, but after realising some of them had been tampered with or were completely false I decided to not even bother attempting to contribute data from these images.

Best to just keep to the real stuff.

I was just curious about the rules, because I've been seeing a lot of images of actors and the like, and wondered where those pics came from! Plus, I've been thinking about posting images of every single part of a release - cover, spine, back cover, disc images, inserts, etc. without any sort of watermark to prevent someone from downloading and using said images to create a bootleg copy - for themselves or for profit. As I have noticed, some releases are on DVD-R media to begin with; AND some of these releases are listed as limited to 25 copies, or something similar. Just throwing it out there...perhaps I don't believe in the goodness and honesty of people!!

Yeah I've thought of that, and with the fact that 'cogs as a whole now doesn't enforce any size restrictions on images also means that it is easily to duplicate.

I guess that is something the site owners/administrators will have to deal with if/when it may arise as an issue.

We've been submitting scans of complete releases on Discogs for a while now, and it's still going stronger than ever.

Where are people getting these non-copyrighted screen shots and images of actors, etc.?! I understand about the release photos -- but I am confused as to how all these images are being uploaded.

Are people taking photographs of their television sets to get a screen shot?

Where are people getting these non-copyrighted screen shots and images of actors, etc.?! I understand about the release photos -- but I am confused as to how all these images are being uploaded.

Are people taking photographs of their television sets to get a screen shot?

Images of actors are being taken from "publicly available publicity shots" as outlined in the Discogs image guidelines. https://www.discogs.com/help/submission-guidelines-images.html#Artist_Images

Still wondering about screen shots from tv episodes - not of actors but like this for example:

http://www.filmo.gs/film/34796-Airplane-a-Wing-and-a-Scare

This is more of an issue now than ever; REQUIRING users to submit images of the actual item in their possession would eliminate many issues.

The guidelines are quite clear. If you see instances of users uploading images that don't adhere to the guidelines you can add a history comment and discuss it with the user in question.

if i see copyright images i usally tell the user and t gets removed soon after.

alao unreadable images are a very big problem / images copied straight from amazon.

It's becomming tge norm on here people copy from stores and think they are helping, how do we stop this.

I'm talking about images around 100×200 pixels which you can't even read the front case.

new user using watermarked images https://www.filmo.gs/users/edcanola

and copying directly from online sources

i disabled like all his images and told him watermarked images is not permitted on any of the ogs sities.

and copying directly from online sources

The LaserDisc Database is used often for this sort of thing.

See also Criterion Collection website and various horror and wrestling VHS/DVD/Blu-ray sites. Let's not forget Amazon.

Nothing can or will be done about this.

It's annoying trying to check for companies, i think it should be required to upload a front and back image of the product.

Otherwise we will have lots of amazon copies.

Another new user using stock online source images.

https://www.filmo.gs/users/c_hallowell?sort=date_added%2Cdesc

Jo_Store it is annoying but like EK_ has mentioned its something that we will struggle to deal with, certainly at this stage of the site. This is a problem that unforunately plagues every single community based website where people are more focused on meaningless points than actually submitting useful data.

If you find the image is not up to the guidelines:
https://www.filmo.gs/guidelines/general#images

You have the right to disable it as a community member of the website, of course explaining why the image has been disabled and refer back to the guidelines.

Of course if you find yourself in a situation where the original submitter is working against you actively then you can submit a support request to the team:
https://support.discogslabs.com/hc/en-us/requests/new

If you come across a sub that has lacking information and you have the release right in front of you then I am always of the understanding that you can take that release and begin to add detail to it. Of course try and make every attempt to make sure the lacking release is likely the same as the release you are adding - which I know is not easy to do when the original submitter hasn't added anything helpful and probably has never (and will never) own the physical item.

An example would be, if you find the release has only one item of identification, say barcode, as yours then you could probably assume that it is the same release. Yes you won't get "the point" for it but that's not the idea, and really what is a point here and there to lose? In the last 6 months of subs this has occured only maybe once or twice, with the rest of the "matches" being to submissions which were already reasonably detailed with images.

An example would be, if you find the release has only one item of identification, say barcode, as yours then you could probably assume that it is the same release.

I wouldn't assume that (using a GTIN as the only identifier). Some titles will have same identifiers with cover/packaging variants - usually later printings. And without front and back images of the actual product the entire release should be DELETED!!!!! In my opinion. :)

EK wrote_:

An example would be, if you find the release has only one item of identification, say barcode, as yours then you could probably assume that it is the same release.

I wouldn't assume that (using a GTIN as the only identifier). Some titles will have same identifiers with cover/packaging variants - usually later printings. And without front and back images of the actual product the entire release should be DELETED!!!!! In my opinion. :)

Yes, if the staff starteddoing that it would help :)

i asked user molten.gold to change images on

https://www.filmo.gs/release/343783-machete-kills/history

due to the watermark and being 240x240 pixels he did though however and he says.

unreadable? i could see it when i listed it - what means unreadable? this is not a book ... just kidding ... do not find a better one and cannot see if it is watermark. please do me a favor and upload an appropriate one for me. unless we do not have a picture until someone else comes along and does it. i'd really appreciate. thank you, norb

and what does a norb mean?

Its a shame how this site is going :(

i contaced staff about how we can resolve around this in best pratices.

cause molten has uploaded a few really bad quality images my gut is telling me to disable them but i know he will just re-upload something from another website.

Staff has been M.I.A.

Now i read up on discogs picture rules.

they say bad quality images should not be used for releases of an item eg dvd bluray cd etc.

This means the use of low quality pictures around 100 x 200 pixels should not be used on any ogs sities.

Now i told molten on this one below but he just reuploaded the same image here.

https://www.filmo.gs/release/344298-morning-of-the-earth

and gonna disable this one being 200 × 300 pixels, which is low quality and i can't see whats in the bottom right corner.

https://www.filmo.gs/release/344516-keoma-melodie-des-sterbens

I will refer molten to here so he can read the reasons and i hope he dosen't ignore me and reupload the same size images.

And this one 200 x 300 ...

https://www.filmo.gs/release/344540-last-days

why are all these bad quality getting uploaded there is no point to even try and catalouge items with not having the item in hand.

well he fixed one but still reuploading bad quality on last days and morning of the earth.

I think the reply from sound.and.vision above covers the best way to tackle these submissions.

  • Do disable low quality and watermarked images
  • Let the original submitters know why you are doing so through history comments or submission notes.
  • Link them to the image guidelines or threads like this
  • Kindly encourage detailed pictures
  • If you have the exact item in your possesion, add a better image yourself.

EK wrote_:

Staff has been M.I.A.

Apologies for slowness in replies. Mostly due to summer holiday season, with people away from their keyboards.

Mostly due to summer holiday season

Summer is the worst. Too warm, too bright, too many children and stupid adults being loud and disturbing me.

kalli wrote:

I think the reply from sound.and.vision above covers the best way to tackle these submissions.

  • Do disable low quality and watermarked images
  • Let the original submitters know why you are doing so through history comments or submission notes.
  • Link them to the image guidelines or threads like this
  • Kindly encourage detailed pictures
  • If you have the exact item in your possesion, add a better image yourself.

Thanks kalli this is what i have been encoraging, on morning of the earth he said "i can't find another image, so no image then"

as i kindle linked him here and to the discogs picture rules and saying low quality pictures are not permitted on the ogs sities.

I also asked if he could add pictures of the item.

Everyone should start disabling ALL the online sourced images that show the release at an angle.

per guidelines:

"Images should be good quality, face-on, readable, correctly oriented..."

Ok thanks eK if i see them from now will do.

Login or Register to post a reply to this topic.