Games in need of NEW SCANS!!

[logical123]

Sega Saturn:
http://www.rfgeneration.c...nfo.pl?ID=U-060-S-01550-A - Scans are VERY blurry


More will come soon. If any of those who have or can get better scans to replace these, it would be greatly appreciated. Thanks, from all of us!

[Tan]

Members have always been encouraged to submit new scans for any game from any system if they feel they can be improved. For more information, check out the Image Submission guidelines posted here:

http://www.rfgeneration.c....php?action=policies;id=4

[logical123]

But I don't own that game... 

[NES_Rules]

I get what Logical is trying to do: bring attention to the games with sub-par scans. Because sometimes (especially for game and manual scans) people who want to submit scans don't actually look at them, they just see that it does or doesn't have a scan.

I don't know if this thread will actually do any good, but it seems like it's worth a shot.

[Tan]

I get what Logical is trying to do: bring attention to the games with sub-par scans. Because sometimes (especially for game and manual scans) people who want to submit scans don't actually look at them, they just see that it does or doesn't have a scan.

I don't know if this thread will actually do any good, but it seems like it's worth a shot.

I'm sure the people who spend the time and work submitting these scans with their names on the credits of each game page don't want to see their work being criticized and singled out for replacement in a public thread. We approve replacement scans all the time, but we don't make a public display of it.

[NES_Rules]

I get what Logical is trying to do: bring attention to the games with sub-par scans. Because sometimes (especially for game and manual scans) people who want to submit scans don't actually look at them, they just see that it does or doesn't have a scan.

I don't know if this thread will actually do any good, but it seems like it's worth a shot.

I'm sure the people who spend the time and work submitting these scans with their names on the credits of each game page don't want to see their work being criticized and singled out for replacement in a public thread. We approve replacement scans all the time, but we don't make a public display of it.

I know I'm not the same as everyone else, but I have no problem with people criticizing the scans I submit. Some of the scans I've submitted only because I feel they're better than nothing, and I welcome any one to replace them.

[Tan]

I get what Logical is trying to do: bring attention to the games with sub-par scans. Because sometimes (especially for game and manual scans) people who want to submit scans don't actually look at them, they just see that it does or doesn't have a scan.

I don't know if this thread will actually do any good, but it seems like it's worth a shot.

I'm sure the people who spend the time and work submitting these scans with their names on the credits of each game page don't want to see their work being criticized and singled out for replacement in a public thread. We approve replacement scans all the time, but we don't make a public display of it.

I know I'm not the same as everyone else, but I have no problem with people criticizing the scans I submit. Some of the scans I've submitted only because I feel they're better than nothing, and I welcome any one to replace them.

I'm much the same way, but I can't speak for the 1000+ collectors on the site nor the hundreds of people who contribute scans and photos every year. We have to stay on the side of caution and sensitivity because we don't want to alienate anyone so that they refuse to submit images anymore, that would be a loss to the whole community.

Some may be cautious for HDD space and use a lower res, some may have older scanners, or go the extra mile to find one somewhere just so they can help us out and have to work with what they have. We appreciate every submission made and still reject many pics and scans we feel aren't up to par. At the same time we approve many replacements every month as well, it's a good system that works for us.

[logical123]

I'm sorry if I "singled" anyone out. 

I noticed though on that particular scan, the resolution is good, but the image size is smaller than 550 on the short side. Its about 425. Perhaps we need to make it more clear that the 550 on the short side makes the image small in file size, yet good in image quality. Thanks!! 

EDIT: That is wrong... The "smaller than 550" photo is on a different game, but we should defiantly make it more clear that 550 is a godly number, and batch image resizers are your friend, not foe.

[Tan]

I'm sorry if I "singled" anyone out. 

I noticed though on that particular scan, the resolution is good, but the image size is smaller than 550 on the short side. Its about 425. Perhaps we need to make it more clear that the 550 on the short side makes the image small in file size, yet good in image quality. Thanks!! 

EDIT: That is wrong... The "smaller than 550" photo is on a different game, but we should defiantly make it more clear that 550 is a godly number, and batch image resizers are your friend, not foe.

All those things are made quite clear in our image guidelines, as well as offering free programs for image resizing & converting on the same page. We like to think members actually read those, seeing as they greatly improve the speed of submission approvals, but you never know.

[Fuyukaze]

I'm sorry if I "singled" anyone out. 

I noticed though on that particular scan, the resolution is good, but the image size is smaller than 550 on the short side. Its about 425. Perhaps we need to make it more clear that the 550 on the short side makes the image small in file size, yet good in image quality. Thanks!! 

EDIT: That is wrong... The "smaller than 550" photo is on a different game, but we should defiantly make it more clear that 550 is a godly number, and batch image resizers are your friend, not foe.

It should also be noted that the 550 wasnt always the rule.  There was a time not too long ago that it was smaller.  It's why when checking over one's own collection for scans to submit, always check that the images current are up to 550.