CCL Messageboard

I would like to have a discussion, and maybe make some hard-and-fast ground rules (or at least some stronger guidelines) concerning Captions on Change Requests. Specifically, concerning the ratios on variants, and how the captions should be written.

Usually, around Wednesday or Thursday, I try and go through the new releases, and add any missing ratios to the entries. I have access to a Diamond acct., and I'm able to do a search on the releases, and get accurate (or as accurate as Diamond's website says) information.

Most of the time, it's ARTIST 1:XX COVER. Sometimes, there's a descriptive note. ARTIST 1:XX VIRGIN COVER. And, as with most of the current DC books, if there's a standard cover and a 1:25 sketch cover by the same artist, the standard has been:

Standard Cover
1:25 Wraparound Sketch Cover

They're being entered into the system initially as of late as Wraparound 1:25 Sketch Cover. I changed one yesterday, approved by Crackerjack, and today, when I went to see if the credits and such were filled in, I saw it changed back.

And, looking through at least the Aquaman title, I see that ALL of the 1:25 variants are being changed back. They're being approved, by at least 2 different approvers, and changed after the fact.

I don't care, either way. I'm just trying to keep things the same for every issue. Obviously, there's some confusion or difference of opinion, because they're being changed, and changed again.

Can we get some discussion amongst us? Can the Approver changing things back speak up, so we can have some idea of what's going on? I don't want to step on toes and continue changing these things, having them approved, only to have someone else have to go back and change them BACK and third time. Ya know?

I haven't been changing anything, but I'm all for ratios to be at the end (or as far to the right as possible) of a caption. A ratio isn't helpful information when trying to identify something in the database. Something that describes the actual cover is helpful and, to me, should be first.

So you'd like it to be

Wraparound Sketch Cover 1:25

That seems valid. I'd like to see what others have to say, but I could definitely understand your point. A descriptor is much more important than a ratio.

That'd be my preface, yes. The conversation that took place long ago was that you'd SAY "the 1:25 Wraparound Sketch Cover." Perhaps, but that doesn't work great for a database.

All for hearing others opinions on this now.

To be honest, I'm pretty indifferent. We already put notes about limited print runs (ie 1/500) at the end of captions, so I have no problem putting the rations at the end as well.

I agree that if I were saying the caption, I'd move the ration up in order of grammar, but that should have no bearing on where it is when written in the caption.

Question: If we agree to put the ratios at the end like we do with the limited print run numbers, will that cause confusion with either a) captions that look different scattered throughout the database, or b) the average user not knowing the difference between / and : in the captions?

Well, I already know that the Avatar books have the ratio moved to the end of the caption. :) I personally don't think the average user really notices the captions THAT much, to be confused by 1:25 and 1/500. I suppose one solution to that possibility would be to add # in front of print run listings. 1:25 and #1/500.

Having a sense of continuity of what I'm aiming for here. I really don't care WHERE the ratio goes, so much as I want it to be standardized throughout. If I'm changing it to one method, because that's what I've seen, and someone else is changing it to another method, it's going to cause headaches.

And I'm sure this will give a couple of fellow OCD-like people ample opportunity to go through and change all the old captions. :)

I'm not sure if this is in the guidelines or not, and I can't believe I'm supporting something batman007 said, but here's the ratio guideline as it was spelled out to me (quoting from memory):

As long as I've been here this is how we've handled ratios (and I do fix captions when I see them out of order). If it's not spelled out in the guidelines we need to correct that.

Per the example provided in the CCL Guidelines, the format should be "Artist Ratio Description Cover"



Why anyone is approving anything that doesn't match the Guidelines is beyond me.

I prefer having the ratio before the description of the cover because it just makes more sense to me.

Note: The Guidelines have had that example in them as long as I can remember. While they do not explicitly describe the order of terminology, the example provided does show the order originally agreed upon.

I actually support SwiftMann's version. (OMG ... we agree on something. The world MUST be ending in December... :D)

Maybe a change to the guidelines?

What Scott quoted is what I've been following, but what happens in instances like I've mentioned, where the artist name is NOT being used in the caption.

Cover A: Standard Cover

Cover B(1): 1:25 Wraparound Sketch Cover

Cover B(2): Wraparound 1:25 Sketch Cover

I've been changing the new 52 DC Covers to B(1), and someone has been going through and changing them BACK to B(2).

I don't want to waste my time (or the Approver's time) with CRs that are going to be undone afterward.

To me, I would say B(1) follows the Guidelines.

I personally don't care one way or the other, but no matter what is in the caption I think the ratio at the beginning is super ugly.

I think the DC ones are different where there is no artist being added and there are 2 descriptions being used (Wraparound and Sketch or Black and White).

I don't think anyone disagrees with that. It's the logical extrapolation from the guidelines. It's just that ratio first sucks.

For everyone who has no idea what a ratio is, What's a Ratio anyway? In terms of models ships and cars if you tell me this books is a 1/10 or 1/25 I would expect to get a comic book 1 twenty-fifth the size of a regular comic book which would be really helpful if I wanted to select comics that would take less room to store but not so easy on the eyes to read although if they can read that grain of rice I'll figure a way to read tiny X books.

It's in the CCL Change Request Guidelines. Typically it applies to retailer incentives or multiple standard covers. Dynamite often has multiple "standard" covers - if there are 2 standard covers, one might be 3:4 and the other 1:4.

It doesn't faze me at all to have the ratio as the first thing. I happen to prefer the consistent layout of the Caption using the example from the Guidelines. If there isn't an artist listed OR the artist for all the covers is the same, drop it.

That just sounds like a stupid thing to do. Picture this, I'm at the drive through screaming at the crackling voice trying to place an order for a chocolate milkshake and the static keeps telling me to pull up to window 1 and pay in advance for 75 vanilla milkshakes or I can't have a chocolate and if the kids in the back want one each also since they always fight and argue if I only get one and expect them to share that now I'm required to pay for 225 vanilla milkshakes.

Now think about that in this case it's not even 2 seperate flavors of milkshake. It's the same milkshake in 2 different cups. Kinda makes me glad I gave up buying new issues in 1991.

In terms of this discussion, it appears that it's very possible to have over 100,000 comics without knowing any of that ratio stuff so the average person off the street may not really care whether a ratio that applied to an order form at a store six years ago is put in front, behind or left off entirely.

Thank you for your opinion. Just because you're uninformed about ratios and how a DATABASE should contain as much accurate, pertinent information about a comic doesn't mean we're going to throw away valid, useful information.

From The Change Request Guidelines:

The Cover Description Field can also denote the distribution ratio associated with a particular comic book. If you know the distribution ratio such as a retailer incentive cover, you denote it in the form of a RATIO.

EX: Michael Turner 1:75 Sketch Cover

This means that for every one copy of the variant, retailers were required to order 75 copies of the standard edition.

If you are denoting a comic with multiple covers of EQUAL distribution there is NO NEED to add a ratio. It will be understood to be of equal ratio. However, the artist notation is allowed as stated in example 4a.

In the case of a signed comic with a limited run, you will make the notation in the field in the form of a FRACTION.

EX: Dynamic Forces Cover (Signed by Bendis) 1/2500 or DF Cover (Signed by Brian Michael Bendis) 1/2500

This means that there are 2500 signed and certified editions for this particular comic book cover. Dynamic Forces are understood to come with a certificate of authenticity. There is no need to put "w/COA" in the Cover Title Description for Dynamic Forces.

There is a lot of good and useful information in the Guidelines for anyone adding info to the Database. It is a good read.

It's important info because it explains the scarcity of a particular issue.

Sure we do. We ignore stuff like indicas, cover titles and such all the time. Easy example, I just figured out where to file

Masakazu Katsura's Shadow Lady #8:Eye's of a Stranger #2
That would be shadow Lady #9

Masakazu Katsura's Shadow Lady: Dangerous Love #4
That would be Shadow Lady #4

Found them all by myself seconds before submitting the new titles.

I'm just still trying to picture in my head how knowing a store had to buy 10 other copys to be able to buy that one is anymore relevent than how much the store paid in rent to be able to pay for the order or wether it was shipped in paper or plastic. Still sounds like an irrelevent bit of confusion taking away from other stuff. 1/25 means stuff like there were only 25 copys. Now you're saying it could mean there might be 10,000 copys out there if the 25 was a ratio and not a quantity printed and the print run was 250,000. I was reading the back of one of the Uncanny X-men's the other day and they had all that print run information added as part of a postal requirement. I was thinking that kinda info might be interesting too but maybe in the description area instead of the caption.