• eiki over 3 years ago

    eiki edited over 3 years ago
    I've recently bought 2 of those Secret 7" that were available in the UK during the Teenage Cancer Trust/Talenthouse exhibition.

    This operation consisted into about 600 artists creating 700 unique sleeve design inspired by one of the songs amongst a list of 7.

    1 The Cure - Friday I'm In Love
    2 Florence + The Machine - Only If For A Night
    3 Bombay Bicycle Club - Lights Out, Words Gone (Rub A Dub)
    4 CSS - City Grrrl
    5 DJ Shadow - Come On Riding (Through The Cosmos)
    6 Noah & The Whale - Old Joy
    7 Ben Howard - Black Flies

    Most of those sleeves were presented anonymously during the exhibition 3 weeks back, the buyer had to guess and could get away with it for 40 pounds minimum.

    The remaining sleeves were subsequently put on an auction website open for international bidders last week and it ended up on Friday. with the same anonymous/guess-what-is-inside concept.

    I bought 2 sleeves of the same artist. The one I was lurking at (if you guys visit my collection page you'll see who it was from).,

    I wonder how to submit this release.

    My idea was to put in the credits list, the artwork person, with between brackets the number of the sleeve (all the releases are stamped and numbered on the back, with the name of the designer hand-written).

    For example: Artwork By [Sleeve N°342] John doe

    Would that be right?

    N.B: if it's true that each sold sleeve was unique in term of design, each artists received a copy of his design autographed by the artists he designed for. We then have 2 existing copies worldwide.

    N.B2: 100 sleeves were designed for each artist, their numbering is comprised between 1 and 700 in a totally random order. e.i: the cure is not ranging from 1 to 100.
  • gboe over 3 years ago

    gboe edited over 3 years ago
    eiki
    Would that be right?

    Answering from a general POV - as I can't recollect an exact previous situation - a release is unique in Discogs if it left the plant differently than another release version.

    There's some details missing in your description (Though I don't think they'll make adifference).

    Let's say a label releases 7 different 7" in 100 copies with an all white sleeve - and then 600 artists decorated those sleeves released as white - then no. The the release version is the one with the white sleeve. What's been done to the white sleeve after it was released does not make it unique no more than if they were signed by the gruoups. If the white sleeve releases were designed to be decorated by the artists, then a note should explain this.

    If however a large number of unique covers were manufactured and then released - they should be subbed separately for every unique variation. E.g. there were 12 and 8 unique covers respectively for these releases:
    http://www.discogs.com/Ian-Dury-And-The-Blockheads-Do-It-Yourself/master/101381
    http://www.discogs.com/New-Order-Everythings-Gone-Green/master/3358

    To give a final answer you need to detail what was made before and after release by the record label. Essentially - who released the covers?

    And not even everything made in the manufacture makes a unique justification in Discogs. If e.g. releases are individually numbered - like:
    http://www.discogs.com/viewimages?release=1113362
    that doesn't call for a submission for each copy - though they are unique.

    Are the vinyls - regardless of covers - unique?
  • eiki over 3 years ago

    there were 7 songs to get the inspiration from, each song have 200 vinyl discs. 100 pieces were available for market/charity, 100 were given back to the artists who designed each sleeve.

    all vinyl discs are the same for each artist.

    i didn't give all details because the only thing that changes here for a SAME band release IS the cover. I thing this is TalentHouse who is the father of the sleeve operation. I don't know yet who actually paid for the vinyl to be pressed, e.g: what is the label?, i will receive those vinyl soon.

    this release doesn't properly exist to the public, it was made available only for this event, not any other format exist for this song, apart of it being on the last LP.

    I've read at their website that a series of 7 generic white sleeve (for each song) with a die cut were made available during a contest, and that is only what exist in term of white sleeves.

    i dont want to enter those copies as ALL UNIQUE, i want to know if it is OK to enter in the credits for this vinyl (with all different covers that could cove over time), the credits role with the sleeve number between brackets and the artist name in the next field. i find it logical that way but need a second advice.
  • gboe over 3 years ago

    If the 7" vinyls are pressed especially for this release - and are not just a regular release with a replaced cover - then there would be 7 unique limited edition releases each in a 200 copies.

    You were able to buy these - then they were available to the public

    Until something else is informed it sounds like the releases to be subbed is the 7 white sleeved ones. What an artist, retailer or band member applied on the cover after release does not get a credit.

    But it sounds like the 7 releases belongs in a series. Then you could all this info including a list of the artist names.
  • eiki over 3 years ago

    Belongs to a series for a punctual event: http://www.secret-7.com/
  • eiki over 3 years ago

    @gboe, i have an idea of how i will submit it, the only thing I ask here is about the design credits, this is not answered yet.
  • gboe over 3 years ago

    gboe edited over 3 years ago
    eiki
    Belongs to a series for a punctual event: http://www.secret-7.com/

    According to the site the 7" will be specially pressed for the event/release with a previously unreleased dub version on the back. So you definately got unique releases - but only 7 of them - not 700.

    eiki
    the only thing I ask here is about the design credits, this is not answered yet

    It's been answered:
    gboe
    What an artist, retailer or band member applied on the cover after release does not get a credit.

    But that's just one opinion. You should wait for some more.

    Meanwhile you could investigate your motives perhaps. Your wish as a collector/possible seller to have a rare and unique item - 1 of only 2 in the world rather than 1 out of 200 - could bias your intentions of inflicting 700 submissions on the database for basically 7 releases.

    That would serve your investment - but not the database.
  • eiki over 3 years ago


    gboe
    Meanwhile you could investigate your motive. Your wish as acollector to have a rare and unique item - one of only two in the world rather than 1 out of 200 - could bias you intentions.


    i absolutely don't intend to have a unique release added to the database, this is a misunderstanding. I don't know what got you into this since the beginning. My intention here is to create an entry for this artist vinyl disc i have, i happen to have 2 different sleeves, and the way i thought to enter this release was simply to add into credits that number 235 was designed by X, while 456 was designed by Y.

    Where did I say any place that i wanted to create a unique release for each?

    those covers were done FOR this project, they were printed in the same time the vinyl were pressed, by the same entity.

    gboe
    According to the site the 7" will be specially pressed for the event/release with a previously unreleased dub version on the back. So you definately got unique releases - but only 7 of them - not 700.


    this is also something i've said above, there were 7 singles, 7 songs, each song gets 100 artists to create a sleeve, it makes 700 available for charity auctions, and 700 more that were given back to the artists who designed them.
  • eiki over 3 years ago

  • eiki over 3 years ago

    eiki edited over 3 years ago
    http://www.secret-7.com/ check artwork page

    you'll see that each sleeve only exist in 2 numbers (1 for charity/1 as a present to the designer) BUT 100 people did a cover for 1 song.

    meaning = 100 different covers/artwork for a SAME SONG

    i intend to add all designers under a SAME entry to the database (of course if it's the same). All those 700 sleeves were numbered and designer is written too.

    CREDITS:

    Design [Sleeve 345] ==== X
    Design [Sleeve 124] ==== Y

    etc, and put the pics
  • gboe over 3 years ago

    gboe edited over 3 years ago
    eiki
    don't intend to have a unique release added to the database, this is a misunderstanding. I don't know what got you into this since the beginnig.

    The second line in your original posting did.
    eiki
    600 artists creating 700 unique sleeve design

    In "Discogsian" unique design also means unique release = own submission = 700 new submissions.

    If what you intend is something else - to create only 7 unique releases - and stuff 100 different Design credits into each - that's something different.

    Those 7 releases as described wouldn't conflict with the uniqueness criteria.

    If you can list 100 designers in a sub - I don't think it would conflict technically or with the guidelines. Someone else would have to answer that. It would though conflict with the idea of Discogs as a database focusing on audio.

    eiki
    100 people did a cover for 1 song.
    meaning = 100 different covers/artwork for a SAME SONG

    I got that. What you need to get is that what matters is if they did it before or after official release - if the white sleeve were the labels last hand on the project.

    This danish punk record was released in plan white sleeve stamped only the text ".... Mal dit eget cover" (Danish for "Paint your own cover"):
    http://rateyourmusic.com/release/album/sigurds_kogeplade___suspicious__ka_/spil_selv__gor_det_selv__mal_dit_eget_cover/
    I believe it was in 500 or 1000 copies. Should your suggested approach be used here, the submission would hold op to 1000 Design credits which could grow to more as 2nd hand owners put their tags or alike on the covers.

    Actually I think it would be against the guidelines too to have 100 designers credited in one sub. If the the unique cover was accepted as a unique release because the cover making was part of the release - then all the 700 releases should have their own sub. However - if Discogs considers the unique release the white sleeved versions - the the designers should have no credit at all in the subs, as you can't credit people for doing something after release.

    Still - best modus would be to see these 7 release as a series - as they have been promoted as group of releases, identical in the white cover prepared for later use and by the unique dub B-sides. The in artist profiles it would be allowed to name the artist. Only those in the db for other achievements can be linked.
  • eiki over 3 years ago

    gboe
    The second line in your original posting did.


    if you read again, i say there were 600 uniquesleeves designed, not unique vinyl pressed. then later on I write again that there actually are 2 similar sleeves, 1 offered for auctions for charity, and the other one given back to the designer. actually I was merely trying to do make a long story shorter. I just want to know about the credits here since the beginning....

    gboe
    If what you intend is something else - to create only 7 unique releases - and stuff 100 different Design credits into each - that's something different.

    Those 7 releases as described wouldn't conflict with the uniqueness criteria.

    If you can list 100 designers in a sub - I don't think it would conflict technically or with the guidelines. Someone else would have to answer that. It would though conflict with the idea of Discogs as a database focusing on audio.


    Yes this is what i intend to do to actually, i would like to enter ALL designers for ALL sleeves realized for a SAME song under the same entry. Simply because what changes is the cover, not the content or format.

    eiki
    It would though conflict with the idea of Discogs as a database focusing on audio.


    in what manner? if there is an initial release submitted, there shouldn't be any problem to add credits to it, and the specific number of the sleeve between brackets?

    gboe
    What you need to get is that what matters is if they did it before or after official release - if the white sleeve were the labels last hand on the project.


    These are the steps, how they were presented to the public:

    A) somewhere in December 2011, designers of all over the world are invited to submit a cover concept at talenthouse, and people like and me can vote to make them win. songs/artists were already known of course for inspiration.

    B) in March at secret 7" website, the guys claim to have received all the TP's, no covers yet, a general paper sleeve.

    Test Pressings

    C) end of March, a contest is organized, at the end someone won a set of 7 x 7", they come in a generic cardboard die-cut sleeve. They contain the definitive releases, but the covers are blank, they were given.

    Competition lot

    D) Mid April, happen the official exhibition, most of the discs are bought, nobody knows what it contains, people base themselves on the design.

    Exhibition
    Back Sleeves

    E) End of April, the remaining discs are subsequently sold on the internet and made available to international buyers.

    gboe
    if Discogs considers the unique release the white sleeved versions - the the designers should have no credit at all in the subs, as you can't credit people for doing something after release.


    Discogs would consider the white sleeves as unique releases because they are the only ones to exist? so there would be 700 (x2) sleeves + 7 white sleeves, meaning 201 vinyl for each artist?
  • gboe over 3 years ago

    eiki
    if you read again, i say there were 600 uniquesleeves designed, not unique vinyl pressed

    I read that. and this too:
    eiki
    what changes is the cover, not the content or format.

    If the sleeve is unique that also grants a new submission = 700 new submissions - if the sleeves are in fact a part of the release.

    Which seems less and less likely as info is provided:
    eiki
    in March at secret 7" website, the guys claim to have received all the TP's, no covers yet, a general paper sleeve

    If they recieve all the "testpressings", could that just be their own term for vinyls without the cover?. Did they recieve testpressings of the 7 vinyls - or - all the 700 vinyls without cover?

    If the latter - which it sounds like - the vinyls were released by then - with no cover.

    If they were all bought by the Secret 7 orgnization, technically they were not available to the public - unless one considers Secret 7 a distributer which I think is an OK shortcut to get these releases into the database, as they indeed are interesting objects

    If the releases are described as "The Secret 7" that btw is the justification for the series - and the title of it.

    What are the labels btw - and are there label logos on the white sleeves? Is Secret 7 the label?

    That's quite important. As that could change things towards the 700 unique new subs way.

    The Secret 7 organizations role has to be determined. Label, distributer, sole buyer?
  • eiki over 3 years ago


    gboe
    If they recieve all the "testpressings", could that just be their own term for vinyls without the cover?. Did they recieve testpressings of the 7 vinyls - or - all the 700 vinyls without cover?


    they received a set 7 x 7", one 7" for each song (there were 7 songs). They received 7 vinyls, not 700.

    gboe
    If they were all bought by the Secret 7 organization, technically they were not available to the public - unless one considers Secret 7 a distributer which I think is an OK shortcut to get these releases into the database, as they indeed are interesting objects


    this is something i will answer more clearly in a few days when I'll receive the discs.

    gboe
    What are the labels btw - and are there label logos on the white sleeves? Is Secret 7 the label?


    On the Secret 7 website, down the page "About Us", there's a Universal Music UK logo. There are 2 articles for the same at universal uk's website.

    I saw a small interview, Kevin King, the curator for the operation says is was done in association with Record Store Day.

    gboe
    If they were all bought by the Secret 7 orgnization, technically they were not available to the public - unless one considers Secret 7 a distributer which I think is an OK shortcut to get these releases into the database, as they indeed are interesting objects


    The whole operation was commissioned under the flag of the Secret 7 organization, all the profits for the selling of those discs went to an association called Teenage Cancer Trust in the UK, and the sleeves were hosted/voted for at TalentHouse.

Log In You must be logged in to post.