Print

Please login or register.
1 Hour 1 Day 1 Week 1 Month Forever
Login with username, password and session length

[bspisak]

What online database is being used for metadata and cover art?

I've found some strangeness/corruption with a couple of cover art images.  Who do I contact?

One of the images is the 800x800 cover art for Esperanza Spalding - Chamber Music Society. Strangely, the image displays correctly in MC, but if I try to import it to MC, it fails and if I try to open it externally, it seems corrupt.

The file size of this image is also smaller than the 600x600 version which works fine.

[Frobozz]

J River uses their own database for cover art.  I think the cover art database is part of their YADB (yet another data base?) database for track and fingerprint data.

The cover art database is from user submitted cover images.  You can submit a cover by selecting an album in MC, going to Tools >> Cover Art >> Submit To Internet.

I found the 800x800 "Esperanza Spalding, Chamber Music Society" cover.  It is corrupt or bad in some way.  MC manages to display the image and thumbnail but external image viewers (like IrfanView) are unable to figure out the file format.  Maybe the image was corrupted during the upload to YADB?  I don't know.  Curious though how MC is able to display the full 800x800 image when other image tools cannot.

[rick.ca]

I wonder if it would be effective to report such images as "offensive." I find nothing more offensive than a corrupt image.

I uploaded a "better" 900 x 900 376 KB image, but it still reports the 800 x 800 166 KB defective image as "best" and a 1000 x 918 269 KB image as "largest." So it seems we need some way of weeding out undesirable images, even if they're not otherwise "offensive."

[bspisak]

So it seems we need some way of weeding out undesirable images, even if they're not otherwise "offensive."

+1

The other image I found with a similar problem was the 144k 600x600 of Mastodon\Crack The Skye.

[Frobozz]

I don't think the offensive image flag is meant for flagging corrupt or bad quality images.  That's just going to confuse someone at J River who has to figure out why the image was flagged.

A better solution would be for J River to figure out how the corrupt image was submitted and why it is corrupt.  Then create an automatic checker type tool to go through the database and remove any other such images.

I usually try to get my images from AlbumArtExchange (I'm also Frobozz over at AlbumArtExchange).  If it's not there then I'll try a YADB lookup in MC.  AlbumArtExchange has good 600x600, 800x800, and 1000x1000 images for Esperanza Spalding's three albums.  "Chamber Music Society" has two sets of images there.  One set has an odd stretching in the middle that makes the violin (or is it a viola?) too long, kind of like a fun house mirror (maybe it was scanned from a cover that had a printing error?).  The other set has an embedded color profile and MC doesn't do color management and doesn't adjust for embedded color profiles.  I don't have the album (it's on my Amazon wish list) so I don't know how the actual cover looks.  I'm not sure if the color profile should be "applied" to the image or "stripped" to get the right look.  It's a judgment call.  To me it looks like the color profile should be stripped and left to default to an sRGB type profile.  Color management is a PITA and fussy.

[DarkPenguin]

I wonder if it would be effective to report such images as "offensive." I find nothing more offensive than a corrupt image.

I uploaded a "better" 900 x 900 376 KB image, but it still reports the 800 x 800 166 KB defective image as "best" and a 1000 x 918 269 KB image as "largest." So it seems we need some way of weeding out undesirable images, even if they're not otherwise "offensive."

It would just waste peoples time.

They already weed out images based on the ones people choose more often.  So things do get weeded.  It just takes a bit of time.

[rick.ca]

A better solution would be for J River to figure out how the corrupt image was submitted and why it is corrupt.  Then create an automatic checker type tool to go through the database and remove any other such images.

Good point. But I wonder why it would even accept an image with a corrupt header (as the example mentioned apparently does). Surely that's easy enough to check.

[bspisak]

Good point. But I wonder why it would even accept an image with a corrupt header (as the example mentioned apparently does). Surely that's easy enough to check.

Well, even MC treats these corrupt images inconsistently: the image displays correctly in MC, though MC won't import it.

Also, I believe these were the default images that were downloaded as cover art. There doesn't seem to be any way to configure MC to look for a preferred size of cover art?

[JimH]

The cover art system has a nice way of moving frequently selected art to the top and will eventually remove any art that is unpopular for any reason.

[bspisak]

The cover art system has a nice way of moving frequently selected art to the top and will eventually remove any art that is unpopular for any reason.

The problem with this particular case is that it displays correctly in MC even though the image is corrupt, so it may not become unpopular.

Although I suppose one could argue that if it displays correctly in MC, then there's nothing wrong with it.

[rick.ca]

The cover art system has a nice way of moving frequently selected art to the top and will eventually remove any art that is unpopular for any reason.

That's not the point, Jim. An 800 x 800 image with a nice looking thumbnail is likely to be "popular" even though it's corrupt. It's therefore unlikely to be removed and will continue to create problems for those who choose it.

Although I suppose one could argue that if it displays correctly in MC, then there's nothing wrong with it.

No, the file is corrupt. It should be rejected.

[bob]

I'm not sure how the corrupt ones get into the data in the first place but now there is a scanner checking all of the entries and removing the bad ones.

[rick.ca]

...but now there is a scanner checking all of the entries and removing the bad ones.

Thanks, Bob.