In my opinion what you made is not contributable... because as you admitted yourself you edited (added the banner) in photoshop. You had to add to the image to make it match the slip cover exactly. As is it wouldn't be identical as the rules request. So if I had it I would have been a no vote... that is my thoughts at least.

I understand what you are saying... but the difference that I see is that the contributor had to add a complete section to the cover to make it match.

I agree, I don't think there's anything wrong using Photoshop to mock-up a cover that matches the original if the original itself can't be scanned for any particular reason.
I don't own Avatar so don't know how reflective it is, but if the new scans look like the slipcase and are a significant improvement over what's there now, I don't really care how they were made.
And I don't think we should get too hung up on the word "identical". Gerri herself has said minor differences are allowed as long the scans are better than the current ones.

Exactly. In my book, the rules are a means to an end.

And besides: it's not like the added banner came from anywhere else than the release in question. If that were the case, I would object.

It might just be me, but I can't see Formerly's images, so in case anybody else can't see them here are the fronts again:

Old


New


Personally I can't see anything in the rules that prevents composite images being submitted. People already use Photoshop to remove scratches, dust, even rounded corners. I see this as just a more sophisticated tidy-up of an image.

While I understand where people who can't vote Yes to the new image are coming from, I will never understand why someone would vote No. If you can't make yourself vote Yes because you prefer to strictly adhere to the rules, yet you feel these images ought to be allowed, why on earth not just click Neutral?

As far as I'm concerned, voting No on this submission does not help the database in any way, shape or form. And isn't that why we're voting anyway? To try to improve the database? That's certainly why I vote, and not because I enjoy following a set of rules.

And then there's the point about Photoshop. While there's obviously a difference between this and some dust removal, it's certainly in the same ballpark. And I've gotta admit I see zero difference between this and rounding corners. Yeah, one is a little more invasive than the other, but they both involve using existing elements to create something new that look extremely similar to the real thing.

Quoting TheMadMartian:

Quote:
I have always hated this rule, and this is the reason why.  We are forced to accept a craptastic image simply because the inner cover isn't an exact match.  In my opinion, the rule should be changed.

It has been stated that small differences are acceptable and it doesn't have to be an exact match, though I'm not sure where the line is drawn wrt a banner like this added later