Image submissions can be subjective.  What looks good (and right) to you may appear totally wrong to others.  Your monitor or scanner may be out of kilter.  The voters monitors may also be out of kilter.

Or everything may be fine on both ends but the scans don't add anything substantive to the existing images.

If scans i submit are declined i don't sweat it.  I have what i want.

Quoting kd5:

Quote:
When I initially contributed the cover scans for these re-released DVDs, I didn't note at the time that the scans looked a tad fuzzy so I re-contributed scans where I sharpened up the images a tad (one notch with Irfanview).  Now they look truer to the actual DVDs that I'm holding in my hands.  But my 2nd contributions (with sharpened images) were declined.  Don't know why they were declined, as I said the sharpened scans look truer to the actual DVDs, but if that's the way it is, I'll lock the sharpened images on my local DVD Profiler database because these look better than the original scans that I had contributed.      -kd5-

Bold by me..

You mentioned they are re-released DVDs. Do they have their own new UPC number? Because if they use the same UPC number as the original release... per rules you can't submit the re-release since the rules say we must keep original release info (including cover scans).

If they do have their own new UPC numbers... then I agree with others that you should try to resubmit.

They are re-releases but they do have their own UPCs. I downloaded the profile for UPC 085391169550 to take a look at the current images and they are pretty bad...black levels are way off and, at least in the case of "Chamber of Secrets", they have a checkerboard pattern to them. Any new images submitted would probably be an improvement in my opinion.

Yes, they are re-releases with their own UPC#'s. 

When I originally submitted these re-released DVDs, I'm sad to say that I wasn't paying as much attention as I should have to the cover scans as they appeared in DVD Profiler, in too big a hurry I guess.  So, sharpening them to where they more closely resembled the actual DVD covers was my attempt to redeem myself. 

As far as what other people's monitors may show, you probably have something there.  My new ASUS LCD delivers a clear, crisp, bright image that is very true to colors (well pleased with this monitor in other words), so to me the resubmitted scans look better, but probably not what some of you may define as significantly better.

Oh well, I have my sharper images, that's what matters to me.        -kd5-

IIRC, Gerry said that the screeners had to see a significan improvement before they would accept new images and it would help if you pointed out where you could see said improvement.