Basic Question - Existing Scans

[Tanavin]

Hey campers,

Been around quite some time, but haven't logged on much. I've actually got a good collection of scanned mags / covers in excellent quality for quite a few of the missing issues on the site (especially several of the Amiga mags - I used to have an Amiga 500 and a 4000/040 back in the day).

My question is that I did not do these scans myself, although a few of them are from originals I provided. Was reading the rule about self-scanning, wondering how strict you want to be about that for issues that are completely missing.

I also did find some very old posts about the CGW museum scans, with complaints about their quality. While I understand they are not perfect, surprised we're not at least mirroring/linking in the interim (and marking accordingly). By the time they appear in better quality, we may very well all be dead.

Not trying to claim glory for someone else's hard work, but rather see value in making sure preserved issues are in as many different places as possible - if only to ensure their survival.

If you think that is amenable I could certainly contribute some of those Amiga mags (again scan quality may not exceed some of the CGW content). Barring that I suppose I could at least upload the cover images?

Let me know your thoughts.

[Jane]

I'm having trouble hunting down the following issues of electronic gaming monthly

Issues 18 19 20 22 27 30 31 32 63 1994 buyers guide and 1995 buyers guide

Also some mega play issues 02 03 05 06 08 09 10 12 13 14 16 17 18 19 21 22 23 24 25 27 28

I looked at almost every web site for these issues and no luck Can you help me out

Thanks

Scott

[Sean697]

I have aquired I think all of these for scanning. Hopefully within the year these will be done. You can view the magazine database to see what has been scanned, what's missing, and what's on deck to scanned.

[E-Day]

Hey campers,

Been around quite some time, but haven't logged on much. I've actually got a good collection of scanned mags / covers in excellent quality for quite a few of the missing issues on the site (especially several of the Amiga mags - I used to have an Amiga 500 and a 4000/040 back in the day).

My question is that I did not do these scans myself, although a few of them are from originals I provided. Was reading the rule about self-scanning, wondering how strict you want to be about that for issues that are completely missing.

I also did find some very old posts about the CGW museum scans, with complaints about their quality. While I understand they are not perfect, surprised we're not at least mirroring/linking in the interim (and marking accordingly). By the time they appear in better quality, we may very well all be dead.

Not trying to claim glory for someone else's hard work, but rather see value in making sure preserved issues are in as many different places as possible - if only to ensure their survival.

If you think that is amenable I could certainly contribute some of those Amiga mags (again scan quality may not exceed some of the CGW content). Barring that I suppose I could at least upload the cover images?

Let me know your thoughts.

If the scans are of magazines you provided to someone to scan, I don't see why those can't be hosted here. They were scanned because you provided them, after all. And if the person who scanned the others on their own say that it's okay for them to be on here that might be fine as well.

[kitsunebi]

I agree with E-Day about the mags you donated, but would caution against uploading other things you weren't personally involved in the creation of. It's tempting to assume that just because we find something on the internet, it's ours to do with as we please in the name of preservation. But I imagine the reason the rule exists in the first place is to avoid potential disapproval should the files' original scanner not want it on this site for whatever reason. Of course, knowing exactly who the original scanner was is often impossible to discern, unless it happens to be you, which is why you are probably the only one qualified to be uploading your own files. Of course, as E-Day said, if you know the scanner and they say it's OK, then...well, they aren't MY rules, but it seems OK to me...

As for linking to other sites carrying scans missing from the download section here, in theory, I agree that it would make sense from a preservationist's perspective. But the other sites may not want to be linked to. As was evidenced by the recent turmoil caused by rampant leeching over at OldGameMags, introducing large amounts of new traffic to a site could very well be detrimental to that site's continued existence.

[Tanavin]

E-Day: That's a good point; I will inquire about permission first and see where that goes. In the meantime, have plenty of covers for the db.

kitsunebi77: Agree about the linking, unwanted traffic can be a problem. Was thinking if we should be more proactive about acquiring permission and mirroring some stuff, provided they meet basic quality standards, especially for things that we're unlikely to get up here anytime soon.

[Sean697]

E-Day: That's a good point; I will inquire about permission first and see where that goes. In the meantime, have plenty of covers for the db.

kitsunebi77: Agree about the linking, unwanted traffic can be a problem. Was thinking if we should be more proactive about acquiring permission and mirroring some stuff, provided they meet basic quality standards, especially for things that we're unlikely to get up here anytime soon.

Ya we try and do all our own scans. Even if we did mirror something , it's only with permission. And we would eventually try to get our own scan. I think we don't need to be the repository for other sites scans. I mean just go to the other site. Now if you were involved with a scan and wanted to submit it here with a Retromags splash page that's fine. But if you didn't scan you would have to get permission from the site that it is on. And Retromags scans do need to meet quality standards. Our scanning guide is pretty liberal and not that restrictive , so if it does t meet that we wouldn't want to put it up.

There are some cases we provide a mirror link. For instance the Top Score newsletter by Steve Harris. There is a site that has 4 of the issues. The site author did not give us permission to host the scan here. However he did give us permission to link to his site from our database. If I see the issues we are linking too I intend to aquired them and make our own site hosted scan. Because they are very rare and don't show up on eBay hardly ever if all that was acceptable. Plus the issues he has are not edited at all and are hosted on his webpage as images with no cropping.

However high quality cover scans aquired from somewhere else are acceptable to upload to out cover gallery.

[Tanavin]

Sean697, I understand not wanting to be a repository for someone else's stuff, but from strictly a preservationist mindset making a collection whole should be an important secondary objective beyond just high quality preservation of what is found. While it's true you can always go to another site to piece things together, sites do go down, and history unfortunately gets lost. Time is our enemy, with each passing year the rarity of the classic mags we have yet to preserve no doubt increases, especially the less commonly known ones, whether due to someone else's negligence, indifference, or accident. The best way to preserve is to make sure such content is in as many hands as possible.

[kitsunebi]

My game magazine folder stands at 450 GB currently, so if ever the call goes out to reupload some lost history, I stand ready and waiting LOL. Till then, I'll follow whatever rules the community deems best.

[Tanavin]

450GB! Nice!

[marktrade]

My 600 DPI vault is nearing a terabyte. And that's just stuff I've scanned.

I wouldn't mind a thread where we post info about other sites that host magazine scans, but as for being a site that tries to link and get everything from everywhere, archive.org already does that. No need to worry.

[kitsunebi]

Yeah, I'm not including raw scans or backup files - just regular downloadable stuff. I don't even keep full-size copies of my own scans. If I'm happy with the end result after reducing the size, then I don't expect I'll feel the need to change it in the future. I've already got 6 HDDs, no sense in keeping even MORE stuff I don't need lol. If someone else thinks they're inadequate, then they're welcome to purchase and scan the mag themselves like I did.

Of course, there will be plenty of people with more stuff on file than I've got, I'm sure. I don't download any mags covering pre-NES systems for example, as I have no interest in those.

[marktrade]

Speaking of which, when do we get to see your scans?

[Sean697]

Sean697, I understand not wanting to be a repository for someone else's stuff, but from strictly a preservationist mindset making a collection whole should be an important secondary objective beyond just high quality preservation of what is found. While it's true you can always go to another site to piece things together, sites do go down, and history unfortunately gets lost. Time is our enemy, with each passing year the rarity of the classic mags we have yet to preserve no doubt increases, especially the less commonly known ones, whether due to someone else's negligence, indifference, or accident. The best way to preserve is to make sure such content is in as many hands as possible.

Unfortunately things don't work like that, I kind of had the same mindset coming into this. Maybe someday archive.org will become that.thats why I decided to do something about it myself. My personal goal is to get every EGM in our database. Instead of asking other people to do it for me, I'm taking all the steps (with help) that I can to get that accomplished. I initially donated all my magazines to scanners on the site, then purchased magazines to get scanned, then started scanning myself. Why, because unless you take a personal stake into getting it done, it probrably won't get done. I personally have no problem with my scans being hosted elsewhere. I've told OGM they can host any of my scans. I've also proposed in the past uploading all,our scans on archive. Which will possibly be happening. But unfortunately a lot of scans sites are very territorial about their scans. So I understand respecting that. It's bad etiquette to just steal someone else work and host it as your own. Especially considering the work that goes into making these scans. A better approach would be working out deals with other sites to share scans. Or convincing scanners to host their work at our site in addition to others.

So I disagree the best way to get stuff archived is to have it in as much hands as possible, not that isn't true, the best thing to do is get involved. Whether donating to our eBay slush fund, or the site, or donating magazines to get scanned, or scanning yourself. Don't expect others to do it, or ask we host people's scans that we didn't do. That and change the mindset and make stuff you have contributed available to others and archive in addition to here. I choose here because this is the most healthy and viable magazine preservation site. And has a great database and wiki functions. I don't speak for the main admins of this site, but I would think their sentiments are not too far off. In addition it seems like I'm this scanning scene there was plenty of drama in the past involving who has the rights to scans that resulted in scans being pulled from our site. Our rules are here for a reason because there was dram in the past. And the last thing we need is some pissed off scanner bringing the attention of what we do to the people who hold the rights to these mags because they are pissed off we stole their scan. Our current system makes it abundantly clear that the work you submit is your own, and you are giving the site the right to host and or share it it, with no right to withdraw it.

When our EGM is complete I'll probrably focus my attention on VG&CE or Gamepro.

[kitsunebi]

Speaking of which, when do we get to see your scans?

As soon as the database gets finished. So no time soon, I expect lol. It's a massive task. I should be finished with my 3rd Famitsu in a couple of days, btw.

Then of course there are the other Japanese mags I have that aren't in the database yet...

[kitsunebi]

So I disagree the best way to get stuff archived is to have it in as much hands as possible, not that isn't true, the best thing to do is get involved.

Yup. I've just recently started scanning, but all of the mags I'll be contributing were recently purchased by me for the sole purpose of cutting apart and scanning to give back to this site (not to mention the scanner I bought just for mags so I wouldn't be forced to work with the flatbed scanner on my printer.) It's a hell of a lot of work, so the more people get involved, the less work there will be to go around, and the more mags will be available. Everyone wins.

[Tanavin]

Unfortunately things don't work like that, I kind of had the same mindset coming into this. Maybe someday archive.org will become that.thats why I decided to do something about it myself. My personal goal is to get every EGM in our database. Instead of asking other people to do it for me, I'm taking all the steps (with help) that I can to get that accomplished. I initially donated all my magazines to scanners on the site, then purchased magazines to get scanned, then started scanning myself. Why, because unless you take a personal stake into getting it done, it probrably won't get done. I personally have no problem with my scans being hosted elsewhere. I've told OGM they can host any of my scans. I've also proposed in the past uploading all,our scans on archive. Which will possibly be happening. But unfortunately a lot of scans sites are very territorial about their scans. So I understand respecting that. It's bad etiquette to just steal someone else work and host it as your own. Especially considering the work that goes into making these scans. A better approach would be working out deals with other sites to share scans. Or convincing scanners to host their work at our site in addition to others.

I've mostly lurked over the years, so I've had no idea there would be or has been drama over scan ownership / distribution. I find it somewhat amusing that the drama exists at all, because you can't exert ownership rights to a scan of an unlicensed work. That's not how copyright works. For true preservation to happen, ownership can't exist.

The whole reason any of us are scanning is in spite of copyright, because we know waiting the 75 years for the copyright of (in many cases) a defunct company to enter the public domain threatens the survivability of the material to begin with, and there's no other viable alternative. But to then entrap such preserved content within someone else's perceived distribution rights is certainly the definition of irony.

But I understand people spend time on things and want some recognition for their efforts. Recognition and ownership are separate things though.

It's true that preservation efforts like scanning take a lot of time. That's why the community size should not be divided; this is the essence of crowdsourcing. When the size of the crowd is artificially truncated (by drama over scan ownership) the real objective - to preserve - is actively undermined. In other words, a smaller crowd simply will not have enough time.

Now all that being said, I'm not trying to rock the boat here. Just making a point. If I have a good scan of something that I don't have permission from the scanner to distribute, I'm not going to upload it. Though any of you are of course free to ask for them. I'll just help out rounding out the cover gallery and indexes as I have time. I also have an intact rather large collection of PC Gamer, that I would donate as others have time to scan them.

[aloram]

When our EGM is complete I'll probrably focus my attention on VG&CE or Gamepro.

Awesome. Seeing as how GamePro and VG&CE were almost polar opposites in terms of writing quality, here's my vote for VG&CE.

[Sean697]

I've mostly lurked over the years, so I've had no idea there would be or has been drama over scan ownership / distribution. I find it somewhat amusing that the drama exists at all, because you can't exert ownership rights to a scan of an unlicensed work. That's not how copyright works. For true preservation to happen, ownership can't exist.

The whole reason any of us are scanning is in spite of copyright, because we know waiting the 75 years for the copyright of (in many cases) a defunct company to enter the public domain threatens the survivability of the material to begin with, and there's no other viable alternative. But to then entrap such preserved content within someone else's perceived distribution rights is certainly the definition of irony.

But I understand people spend time on things and want some recognition for their efforts. Recognition and ownership are separate things though.

It's true that preservation efforts like scanning take a lot of time. That's why the community size should not be divided; this is the essence of crowdsourcing. When the size of the crowd is artificially truncated (by drama over scan ownership) the real objective - to preserve - is actively undermined. In other words, a smaller crowd simply will not have enough time.

Now all that being said, I'm not trying to rock the boat here. Just making a point. If I have a good scan of something that I don't have permission from the scanner to distribute, I'm not going to upload it. Though any of you are of course free to ask for them. I'll just help out rounding out the cover gallery and indexes as I have time. I also have an intact rather large collection of PC Gamer, that I would donate as others have time to scan them.

Honestly your preaching to the choir here. It's just that I've found that this scene is not an organized preservation effort. It is very much a hodgepodge of sites doing this with different motivations. At least at Retromags we are open to sharing. Other places are not. A few years ago I came here with a similar ranting post about what is going on in this community. And I have to say Phillyman has made changes and I started policies to make this site better for it, probrably the best this site has ever been. You have to realize though that if you have a site and are trying to attract visitors, other people taking that content drives people away from your site. It's just the nature of this scene at the moment. There are also very much people doing the same thing who are collecting physical magazines for preservation but are totally opposed to scanning. And think the museum/physical collection route is the best method. Our splash page is more an effort to drive awareness of the site, so people know where to get more scans and help with the effort. You'll notice no individual credit is given on scans themselves. Even know we know full well other sites take our scans and remove the page and post them as their own. We do not engage in that. if you scan stuff and you like our site, you should consider uploading here.