It was released with a black bag, with the big sticker as shown here: image link
That bag was enclosed in a poly bag (I think, I can't if it was shrinkwrap) with a hype sticker on that outer clear plastic bag. (Regardless of the outcome, this can't be primary due to RSG §13.8.2.) image link
Under the black bag is the standard sleeve. image link
There was some back and forth about what the primary image should be. Should it be the black bag (since it's fully encoming the release, not equivalent to a hype sticker or shrinkwrap)? Or should the primary be the sleeve (which is obviously the more conventionally known cover image)? ChiefMojoBear suggests it should be the sleeve image and not the bag. A year ago you had said the same, but I'm confused by one point you made: "thats actually not true. the bag is not the cover. and it has nothing to do with this version. the original pressing had a bag as well and it wasnt the cover then either"
What do you mean by "it has nothing to do with this version"? Are you suggesting that there was a version with no black bag for this release? If so, then we need to be having a different discussion, not just about which image should be primary.
Anyway, just curious what people think about this. I'd rather not get into an edit war here, and having a forum decision would help solidify which way it should go. (I'm mostly fine whichever way we decide, but for the record I would keep the black bag as primary.)
I'll first invite some others who have commented in the sub history: Minimal-Man
As to my opinion which it should be, not sure I feel strongly either way.
RSG §13.8.2. can be probably be interpreted either way: The primary image should be unobstructed whenever possible, i.e. without packaging such as shrinkwrap or jewel cases, or promotional material such as hype stickers. However permanent features such as obis or a special packaging/box should be set as primary image, when possible.
Is this packaging "special" -- it's certainly not "permanent."
I would say the bag should be the primary image, just as if it was a o-card or some other type of "outer packaging", the fact that the "outer packaging" is "boring" don't make a difference.
vormloos
andrenafulvaSorry, I'm allergic to Pink Floyd so I'll sit this one out (but ping again if you need more input)
I got itchy once by Jellyfish (10)
Yeah, I’m aware of some of the .... shall we say, exactitude some PF contributors exhibit on PF submissions. Hopefully this can stay neutral to the PF angle. ;)
My immediate gut feeling suggested “front cover” (men shaking hands).
However, in a case like this, i.e. a Master Release containing a gazillion releases, using the bag image as primary would certainly allow for easier identification of this particular version and would be beneficial to database s and collectors.
My opinion is taking RSG §1.4.2 into . If the difference is subtle, you must explain the difference in the Release Notes, or with images, or by any other effective means, in order that future s can tell their versions apart by referring to the entry in Discogs.
I'm pretty sure these cases were considered in the discussion leading to the current images guidelines and they were (the Pink Floyd and Led Zeppelin exemples) considered as permanent features. Of course, ideally, we should find back this discussion to confirm my memory, but I'm not good at searching the forum.
It was released with a black bag, with the big sticker as shown here: image link
That bag was enclosed in a poly bag (I think, I can't if it was shrinkwrap) with a hype sticker on that outer clear plastic bag. (Regardless of the outcome, this can't be primary due to RSG §13.8.2.) image link
Under the black bag is the standard sleeve. image link
There was some back and forth about what the primary image should be. Should it be the black bag (since it's fully encoming the release, not equivalent to a hype sticker or shrinkwrap)? Or should the primary be the sleeve (which is obviously the more conventionally known cover image)?
ChiefMojoBear suggests it should be the sleeve image and not the bag. A year ago you had said the same, but I'm confused by one point you made: "thats actually not true. the bag is not the cover. and it has nothing to do with this version. the original pressing had a bag as well and it wasnt the cover then either"
What do you mean by "it has nothing to do with this version"? Are you suggesting that there was a version with no black bag for this release? If so, then we need to be having a different discussion, not just about which image should be primary.
Anyway, just curious what people think about this. I'd rather not get into an edit war here, and having a forum decision would help solidify which way it should go. (I'm mostly fine whichever way we decide, but for the record I would keep the black bag as primary.)
I'll first invite some others who have commented in the sub history:
clickspin
JayFraser
inkjet
Minimal-Man
It was released with a black bag, with the big sticker as shown here: image link
That bag was enclosed in a poly bag (I think, I can't if it was shrinkwrap) with a hype sticker on that outer clear plastic bag. (Regardless of the outcome, this can't be primary due to RSG §13.8.2.) image link
Under the black bag is the standard sleeve. image link
There was some back and forth about what the primary image should be. Should it be the black bag (since it's fully encoming the release, not equivalent to a hype sticker or shrinkwrap)? Or should the primary be the sleeve (which is obviously the more conventionally known cover image)?
ChiefMojoBear suggests it should be the sleeve image and not the bag. A year ago you had said the same, but I'm confused by one point you made: "thats actually not true. the bag is not the cover. and it has nothing to do with this version. the original pressing had a bag as well and it wasnt the cover then either"
What do you mean by "it has nothing to do with this version"? Are you suggesting that there was a version with no black bag for this release? If so, then we need to be having a different discussion, not just about which image should be primary.
Anyway, just curious what people think about this. I'd rather not get into an edit war here, and having a forum decision would help solidify which way it should go. (I'm mostly fine whichever way we decide, but for the record I would keep the black bag as primary.)
I'll first invite some others who have commented in the sub history:
clickspin
JayFraser
inkjet
Minimal-Man
I don't think I’ve misrepresented what you've said (at least I'm not trying to). Can you clarify what your position is here? You quoted the entire block of text which doesn't pinpoint what you're specifically responding to.
Ha, yeah I didn't think to search for this specific issue. Looks like that thread resolved with the bag as primary. It so far appears this thread will land that way too, but it's no rush to edit anything yet. Happy to give people more time.
Black bag is the primary. It has to be as that was how it was sold brand new. There is nothing to stop any owner keeping it that way too and I’m sure countless did.
Minimal-Man - please refrain from editing this while the discussion above is ongoing. The image you out as primary cannot be the primary image. As mentioned above, the guidelines are crystal clear that hype stickered covers should not be primary.
It's best to discuss here and wait for resolution before continuing to edit the images.
Just to finish this here, my counts of this thread (not pinging so as to not disturb people again):
Bag as primary:
Silvermo
vormloos
Viril666
chn74
hafler3o
Trepas (I think)
marcelrecords
el_duro
Opdiner
Sleeve as primary:
j_lit
Showbiz_Kid
ChiefMojoBear (I think, unclear based on comment here, but of course was the one to edit to the sleeve as primary)
Minimal-Man - I see you edited the images yet again. Please stop changing the images on this release. It's been explained multiple times now why the image with hype sticker cannot be primary. We can't vote on images, but your edits are EI.
I consider this the same as the original green bag as on XTC - Black Sea.
This is "special packaging".
The guideline of "However permanent features such as obis or a special packaging/box should be set as primary image, when possible." doesn't say this has to be a permanent feature, only that some things that are permanent features should also be the primary image, like obis.
There is an "or" there that separates the "permanent features" aspect of obis and special packaging/box.
The original release of this came in black shrinkwrap, not a bag, and it was fully intended that purchasers should remove the shrinkwrap to reveal the actual cover image. Indeed, of the band were amazed to learn that some fans had kept the shrinkwrap on for decades. Conclusion - the 'shaking hands' image is the front cover and I don't see why that should change just because this version came in a "black bag" rather than black shrink.
sydfloyd
The original release of this came in black shrinkwrap, not a bag, and it was fully intended that purchasers should remove the shrinkwrap to reveal the actual cover image. Indeed, of the band were amazed to learn that some fans had kept the shrinkwrap on for decades. Conclusion - the 'shaking hands' image is the front cover and I don't see why that should change just because this version came in a "black bag" rather than black shrink.
Just pointing out that we're not talking about the original release. It could be that you're right about the other versions, but we can't use that as a factor for determining this version.
baldorr
Just pointing out that we're not talking about the original release. It could be that you're right about the other versions, but we can't use that as a factor for determining this version.
My point was that the band's original intention is more important than a change from shrinkwrap to a bag.
sydfloyd
baldorrJust pointing out that we're not talking about the original release. It could be that you're right about the other versions, but we can't use that as a factor for determining this version.
My point was that the band's original intention is more important than a change from shrinkwrap to a bag.
The point of discogs is to represent what physically exists. What the band intends is never a factor here for anything. If they intend for something they need to release things that way.
baldorr
The point of discogs is to represent what physically exists. What the band intends is never a factor here for anything. If they intend for something they need to release things that way.
Rubbish - if you want to add an 'album' tag, you have to prove that the band / record company intended the release to be an album. So if it's a factor there, why not for the sleeve? This site is riddled with inconsistencies, contradictions and double standards.
sydfloyd
Rubbish - if you want to add an 'album' tag, you have to prove that the band / record company intended the release to be an album. So if it's a factor there, why not for the sleeve? This site is riddled with inconsistencies, contradictions and double standards.
That's a fair point. Let me rephrase - for data that is factual and representing the physical release, we don't take into consideration what the band intended.
For "soft" data like album tags. single, limited edition, country, etc, those do require us to reflect how a release was marketed which is external to the release itself. But even still, in those cases we are still pretty firm on how a source is presented for it to be accepted here. For example, "Limited Edition" has to explicitly be stated that it's limited. If a record company or artist states "Released to a quantity of 500", they might intend for that to mean "Limited", but that has to be explicitly stated for us to use that tag.
You're not wrong that there are inconsistencies and contradictions, but the real world for record releases is inconsistent and full of contradictions. So we have to make some sense of fitting a square peg into a round hole.
sydfloyd
Rubbish - if you want to add an 'album' tag, you have to prove that the band / record company intended the release to be an album. So if it's a factor there, why not for the sleeve? This site is riddled with inconsistencies, contradictions and double standards.
You want to go and ask Roger what his preference is for primary image for catag purposes? We are the 'archivists' here. for an album tag we need an official source. for primary image we make an educated guess while trying to follow the guidelines as much as we can. often there isn't one definite answer or one that everyone will agree on. What is the point you are trying to make here or is it just a way to express general disapproval? this site isn't so bad imho despite the inconsistencies and contradictions.
vormloos
You want to go and ask Roger what his preference is for primary image for catag purposes? We are the 'archivists' here. for an album tag we need an official source. for primary image we make an educated guess while trying to follow the guidelines as much as we can. often there isn't one definite answer or one that everyone will agree on. What is the point you are trying to make here or is it just a way to express general disapproval? this site isn't so bad imho despite the inconsistencies and contradictions.
I made my point above in my first post in this thread. You've obviously chosen to ignore it. If an 'educated guess' is what is required, then I'll go with what the band originally intended, not someone's 50/50 hunch.
sydfloyd
I made my point above in my first post in this thread. You've obviously chosen to ignore it. If an 'educated guess' is what is required, then I'll go with what the band originally intended, not someone's 50/50 hunch.
There's no hunch as there is no right or wrong answer. This version comes in a bag that imo represents well the specific version, meets RSG §13.8.1, and distinguishes the release in the MR, which is a plus. The band's reaction to fans tendency to keep virtually everything is not relevant to how we catalog the release here imo.
vormloos
There's no hunch as there is no right or wrong answer. This version comes in a bag that imo represents well the specific version, meets RSG §13.8.1, and distinguishes the release in the MR, which is a plus. The band's reaction to fans tendency to keep virtually everything is not relevant to how we catalog the release here imo.
Well, whatever, someone with sway here will just arbitrarily decide one way or the other and that'll be that.
sydfloyd
Well, whatever, someone with sway here will just arbitrarily decide one way or the other and that'll be that.
I'm not sure why you're being so aggressive here. I can only speak for myself, but I agree that tendencies do shift over the years here. What was a strong consensus 15 years ago might change and be overturned today. Does that mean it will change in another 15 years? Who knows. I hope everything we do here is critically viewed and we can shift when we find out a longstanding rule or consensus isn't really working.
All of that comes through discussion - but through collaborative discussion, not aggressive discussion. I don't feel so strongly about things to get angry about them, otherwise that's not a good way to talk about things. (Well... I DO get angry about RSG §1.2.3, but that's another conversation. haha)
vormloos
Nope, we vote and reach a majority decision. but you already know that, right?
Well, that's what's supposed to happen, but we all know certain people ride roughshod over the majority at times. Really wish I hadn't bothered posting in this thread now. The only reason I did is because I have an emotional investment in the band and the album in question.
sydfloyd
Well, that's what's supposed to happen, but we all know certain people ride roughshod over the majority at times. Really wish I hadn't bothered posting in this thread now. The only reason I did is because I have an emotional investment in the band and the album in question.
And now you're gonna make me regret spending my time conversing with you. Not really, but you get the point I hope.
Perhaps easy to forget there are actual people behind the posts here, the vast majority of them acting in good faith, my experience at least.
I try to keep emotions out of the discussions here as much as possible, even if it's a band I'm supposedly invested in, Genesis or Yes for example.
sydfloyd
but we all know certain people ride roughshod over the majority at times.
Some may be more dominant or 'loud' but that happens in almost any group of people discussing something. they still count as 1 vote.
sydfloyd
I have an emotional investment in the band and the album in question.
I've found it's best to not bring those emotions to Discogs. There is that FAQ for artists and labels to answer a lot of common questions about what discogs is for and what their interaction can be. (Primarily, the artist does not "own" their profile here. It's not a social media site.) But I kind of wish that could be extended to fans as well.
To me, my understanding of discogs is to accurately catalog released music and the people credited. If I were to be emotionally invested in how my favorite bands are represented here, that would get really complicated. Discogs takes priority over everything else.
Minimal-Man - I'm not sure if you're not looking at the submission history or seeing notifications here, but you need to stop editing the images for this release. The image you are adding cannot be the primary.
This is the 4th time you've edited the images here. I think I'll file an SR. I rarely do this, but unfortunately there is no way to vote EI on images.
