Please remove ALL EXCEPT ONE (i.e. remove two) of this, this, and this image backdrops I uploaded. They are duplicates of one another.

This one should probably be OK at 1920 x 1080. I deleted all 3 for being a bit too fuzzy.

The rest of your reported images were not very good. Maybe try 1280 x 720? I locked the remaining 3 backdrops that were fine.

Please remove ALL EXCEPT ONE (i.e. remove 3 out of 4 of) this, this, this, and this image backdrops I uploaded. They are duplicates (I wasn't sure which version, of the two, was better, and how best to crop the original images).

Not sure, but I think this image backdrop uploaded by Maria180493 should be removed. To me, it looks like it probably lost its original tone/color from the orginal image it must have been edited from. As a comparison, here is what the image looks like used by japantimes.co.jp.

I WILL get to uploading the deleted images at downscaled sizes soon

Please remove ALL EXCEPT ONE

Done.

Not sure, but I think this image backdrop uploaded by Maria180493 should be removed. To me, it looks like it probably lost its original tone/color from the orginal image it must have been edited from.

Deleted! Thanks.

@lineker said:

@tmdb24407783 said:

Please remove ALL EXCEPT ONE (i.e. remove two) of this, this, and this image backdrops I uploaded. They are duplicates of one another.

This one should probably be OK at 1920 x 1080. I deleted all 3 for being a bit too fuzzy.

The rest of your reported images were not very good. Maybe try 1280 x 720? I locked the remaining 3 backdrops that were fine.

Done! Though I got a bit cheeky (or helpful?) and added an alternative downscale to 1600!

And...um...please remove ALL EXCEPT ONE (i.e. remove 17 out of 18 of) of the image backdrops of that black haired asian lady (there's 18 of them so I couldn't be bothered linking them all here). They are duplicates (I wasn't sure which, of three original images, were the best version, how to best crop the image, whether or not to downscale, and if so, wether to downscale to 2560 pxls or 1920 pxls in width).

Please remove EITHER (i.e. only remove one of) this or this image backdrops I uploaded. They are duplicates (I wasn't sure whether to downscale the original image to 2560 pxls or 1920 pxls in width).

Please remove ALL EXCEPT ONE (i.e. remove 3 out of 4 of) this, this, this, and this image backdrops I uploaded. They are duplicates (I wasn't sure how best to crop the original image, and whether or not to downscale the image).

Please remove EITHER (i.e. only remove one of) this or this image backdrops I uploaded. They are duplicates (I wasn't sure whether to downscale the original image to 2560 pxls or 1920 pxls in width).

I have finished going over all and it should be OK now. However, I don't think it's a sustainable method to add so many duplicate images. Ideally you just have to find out by yourself what images work and only upload those. My own trick is to check the image at double zoom. If it still looks good then I know it's going to be fine here. If it looks bad, I know I must downsize even more. Let's see if someone else can provide some more feedback for you.

@lineker said:

However, I don't think it's a sustainable method to add so many duplicate images.

What do you mean "sustainable method"? For me, it's a sustainable method. Or do you mean its not sustainable for tmdb and the amount of admin work it requires? (Are you giving me advice that I could get more done with less effort or are you saying my method is not great for tmdb in some way(s)? There is a big difference between those two).

Please remove this English image poster I uploaded. I have uploaded this and this better versions (one downscaled to max size and the other downscaled to 1600 pxls in width; please remove one of them).

@tmdb24407783 said:

@lineker said:

However, I don't think it's a sustainable method to add so many duplicate images.

What do you mean "sustainable method"? For me, it's a sustainable method. Or do you mean its not sustainable for tmdb and the amount of admin work it requires? (Are you giving me advice that I could get more done with less effort or are you saying my method is not great for tmdb in some way(s)? There is a big difference between those two).

I'm saying that you are the only person I've come across in soon 7 years on TMDb to not be sure about what image is looking good. The main issue is that this method means a multi image report can take 10-15 minutes to process instead of 2-3 minutes for a regular image check. But I'm sure you could also benefit from being more decisive and training your eye for when an image looks upscaled or similar. That's why I was trying to come up with some advice for how you can find the best possible image at once instead of us having to help you find it.

Please remove this English image poster I uploaded. I have uploaded this and this better versions (one downscaled to max size and the other downscaled to 1600 pxls in width; please remove one of them).

Here the original was bad so it was good that you added an upgrade. I kept the 2000 x 3000 image since it looked good at its size. In this case one extra image did not make a difference for me, but the general advice still remains the same.