Submitted by Alpha Flight 1970 on
FLAC
Reward for filling the request:
20
Request details:
Link (Discogs.com or other)*: https://frenesys.bandcamp.com/album/sacrifice-ep
Catalog number *:
Year *: 2019
.
Frenesys - Sacrifice [FLAC]
![Subscribe to Comments for "Frenesys - Sacrifice [FLAC]"](https://xprm.net/misc/feed.png){kind=small}
music requests & search
11 Comments
#1TheKing2023-04-20 15:53
Action:
#2Alpha Flight 19702023-04-23 08:28
Here's a better cover.
https://pixeldrain.com/u/zhPkUaBb
#3Borgild2023-04-23 13:23
There' same but non-upscaled cover at bandcamp https://f4.bcbits.com/img/a3140206206_0.jpg
#4Alpha Flight 19702023-04-23 13:48
If you are referring to me, my cover is from Bandcamp.
#5Borgild2023-04-23 14:21
Dunno, some secret/initial release version then. That png still got same artifacts of overcompressed jpeg
#6Alpha Flight 19702023-04-23 14:43
It's from here: https://f4.bcbits.com/img/a3140206206_1.jpg
When you use _1 instead of _0 in a link like yours you'll get the same original sized cover in .png.
#7Borgild2023-04-23 15:06
Didn't know that, yet checked covers from several other bandcamp shops and all those pngs doesn't look like source for all other jpg variations. If you auto-level those pngs in any image editor, they all got very similar/typical for jpg compression artifacts as in _0.jpg, so probably it's sort of auto-upscale option for some weird reason provided by bandcamp platform itself
#8Alpha Flight 19702023-04-23 17:11
I wonder in which format original Bandcamp images are, maybe either .bmp or .jpg, but presumably just like the one provided by the saler.
Also I compared a lot of the .jpgs and .pngs and I never found any visible differences. Mostly they are most perfect images to find online. Little dots aren't blurred unlike in images from other sites, even iTunes.
#9Borgild2023-04-27 02:30
Ok, here's example: https://5danrecords1.bandcamp.com/album/burning-starlights-ep got _0.jpg which is actually png with file size = 1,66 MB; _1.jpg there got same quality & resolution but file size 2,73 MB. I'd say _0.jpg is the original image that got auto re-encoded just to get bigger file size.
Blurring is mostly a sign of resolution upscale (when, say, discogs' 600x600 becomes 1200x1200 with obvious 0 improvement to detail), i'm talking about difference between lossless png and lossy jpeg (ringing, moire etc) - you need to zoom in into details, maybe auto-level or paint bucket solid parts of the image with 0 tolerance to see the difference. E.g. pick that png from 5danrecords1 and convert it into jpeg with, say, 70 (~300 KB) and 98 (~800 KB) quality and check the difference between all 3 versions.
Ofc it's a completely different image than this cover from frenesys.bandcamp but generally you can get the idea what proper png should look like - clean, with no ringing, blockiness and all kind of color distortion around small elements or letter's edges. But both _0.jpg and _1.jpg at frenesys.bandcamp are the same and got all kind of jpeg compression artifacts - it's ok for jpeg (_0.jpg) and not ok for png (_1.jpg) which pretends to be the original image that was later converted to _0.jpg
#10Alpha Flight 19702023-05-05 19:40
Finally found a little time...
Thanks for the detailed information. Good to learn the .jpgs are quite probably the original covers. As mentioned before there are no visible difference between the .jpgs and the corresponding .pngs, they are just larger in filesize. I thought the .png contain more detailed information but it's probably just useless data.
#11Borgild2023-05-27 08:17
Forgot 1 more argument in favor of _0.jpg being original image - it's exactly the same image that you get when you download a multitrack single/EP/album from bandcamp. Sometimes it's png but usually it's jpg ofc