Confusion about higher quality and bigger pixel count

[kurzih]

First of all, Happy New Year!

I've recently seen multiple claims that are debatable in the Commodore C64 section - and since this one is about Masters of the Universe, I couldn't keep silent about it 😎:



Yes, the pixel size is bigger and smaller in file size on the image that is replacing the previous. But that's where the "good news" ends.

If you open both pictures in full-size (either opening them in their own tab and pressing the + button to get them full-sized or downloading them separately and looking them at actual pixel size):


It's clear that the "smaller" one is much sharper and has more details and more vibrant colours. The other one has just been made bigger from it's original resolution and losing quality in the process - I don't know if someone is making those bigger in purpose for them to have them replace the other ones (a bit egoistical if that would be the case):


(you can click this image I've put together with the same resolution, should open in full-size automatically)

I'm not the author of either of these, but I do like the database to have high quality images instead of just bigger sized images. I think the smaller one is more realistic and uses a very nice plastic cassette tape template, perhaps using a bit too much of the light reflection effect, but it's the most authentic in my taste. But do open both images in full-size to see my point about image quality.

And one other note: Please do not rely on just one source of information when changing the metadata in the database. Too many times have I seen mistakes from Moby Games been transferred in this database just because it's the only source used. In many cases the developer of different ports is missing or wrong. as I've said before it's best to use in parallel websites that are platform specific (ie. https://segaretro.org/, http://hol.abime.net/, https://www.lemonamiga.com/, http://www.atarimania.com/, https://cpcrulez.fr/ etc.).

Edited January 3, 2022 by kurzih

[C-Beats]

Not sure I agree with the replacement, but both could/should able to be added independently. They are two completely different styles of boxes so there is no point in debating file size / dimension at that point. They are entirely different images.

[kurzih]

3 hours ago, C-Beats said:

Not sure I agree with the replacement, but both could/should able to be added independently. They are two completely different styles of boxes so there is no point in debating file size / dimension at that point. They are entirely different images.

And related to that (room for everyone) for some reason some people overwrite even totally different image types just because they seem to want "their" work as the default image and "everyone wants what they have spent hours editing since they look perfect" is the usual defense for that. Like those many big-sized NES/SNES "AI enhanced" (ie. waifu2x)  reconstructions or monochromatic paint-jobs, overwriting good quality authentic scans to be gone forever - I'm not OK with that behavior (I'm totally OK with people making them, but not how they upload them), which is also against database rules if you use the incorrect image tag and worst: removing the option from the Launchbox user to choose from different images like Box - Front / Reconstructed / Fan -Art etc.. I've had to partially stop updating media/metadata on front covers altogether just to protect what I have in my local database.

Edited January 3, 2022 by kurzih