Leaderboard

Mark, I just did the Friday update. It added 300MB to my dB for all the new Magazine entries. How many of your existing customers have a use for all 5,000 issues of The Daily Telegraph from Australia? This is just bloating the dB and making the updates take a lot longer. I would really, really encourage you to allow all of us existing users to CHOOSE whether we want all the Magazines in our local dB or not. And if you start bloating the dB with 'Books', then please add the same option there too. I subscribe to ComicBase to manage my Comics. Nothing else matters to me.

Instead of creating a new title, porting over a user's existing stock, and then deleting the old title, I think that there might possibly be another way to accomplish the same thing. CB could issue a program update that (for example) looks to see if the user has the title Star Wars (1st series) in their database(s). If they do, the update says something like: "This update will rename your existing title Star Wars (1st series) to Star Wars (1977 series). All of your inventory and issue data will be preserved, only the title will be changed to match to master database. Click "yes" to continue. If you click "no", this update will keep your existing title and create a new, separate Star Wars (1977 series)." For the users that click "yes", the updater will execute the "Modify Title" function to change the series title to Star Wars (1977 series). I imagine that something analogous could be done to change the Media Category for titles as well. I believe that the weekly content updates only import data into your database, so this kind of solution would almost certainly have to be done via a program update.

If it helps this gemstone publishing site seems to list most (if not all) of the different versions: https://gemstonepub.com/price-guides/comic-book-price-guides/?sort=newest&limit=100&mode=1&page=1 Specifically, for #39, there appears to be: CB Item # Site description ---------- ----------------- HC 39/A HC Avengers 7.0 x 9.25 $35.00 TPB 39/A SC Avengers6.5 x 9.25 $30.00 (no cover, assuming you want both Avengers cover to be the same variation of A) HC 39/B HC Invaders 7.0 x 9.25 $35.00 (Captain America, Human Torch, Sub-Mariner) SC Invaders 6.5 x 9.25 $30.00 (Captain America, Human Torch, Sub-Mariner) Not in CB. Probably TPB 39/B SC Mass Market edition 6.5 x 9.25 $30.00 (the JSA with the yellow background) Not in CB. Same size as other SC, so probably TPB 39/C

I appreciate the mobile scanning feature when I'm out searching for comics. I have three suggestions and reasons for them to improve the app. 1. How many of us have been out and repurchased a 3rd or 4th of something we already have? (Raising Hand) this guy right here. Being able to cut down on that (unless I wanted to add another copy) and having access to my collection information on my mobile was one of the biggest selling points for me and keeps me renewing my membership. With that said, when you scan in a comic, and it populates with the content of that comic, it would help a lot if it also informed you if you already have this book in your collection with a line item titled "Own _____" above the "Add Qty___" line. I point this out because we either have to be the Rainman or be a Mentat to recall that information right then and there or leave the scan to go back to our Auto Report and scroll for days through our collection to see if we have it or not. 2. MN Guide data. It's great to see the NM Guide cost once the scan pulls up; however, if selected from the "Condition" pull down, another helpful thing might be to know the cost at that chosen condition. Right now, the feature of # of copies on Atomic Avenue is a great alternative to get price ranges, but again it takes us out of the app (well, not me; I have a dual-screen LG), and there are cases there are no available copies on Atomic Avenue so you would then have to click on Writer or Artist to get into Atomic avenue and manually type in the title. 3. If we scan it, another great addition would be another line item showing if we already marked this issue as one of our coveted "Wanted" items and, if not, the option to add it to our database as one we did want if we decide not to buy it at that time. I am pleased with the app and its faster scanning and pulling up comics when I'm out. I have realized that after you scan and go back to scan again, you have to tap the screen for the camera to open again. This might be something with my mobile, but I'm not sure. Thanks again to the app's programmers for making our (my) lives much more manageable.

It is 'Captain America (1st Series)' #Anl 2.

Hi, @Steven L. Dasinger Thanks for your reply. It's not that that titles have to change, it's that they can change. What #1 shows is that titles can change even for something as simple as a stray space or to correct an article placement, while #2 seems to be locked in amber especially for something like the Metal Men mini-series -- even though changing it would make it easier for all collectors to find. While I would prefer the year of release in the title rather than Series 1, Series 2, etc., I'd be find with it just to bring consistency. Don't get me wrong, I applaud the grammar and article corrections of #1, but I find it baffling that there is a reluctance to apply organizational standards to titles in a program designed to organize a comic book, book, or magazine collection. I think that this is the main frustration of myself and my fellow users. Thanks for listening, Walt

In addition to slowing things down, without the knowledge I now have from digging all over for information on these books, it doesn't make any sense. The original title was "Justice League" in 1987 but that became "Justice League International," which changed titles in 1989 to "Justice League America." The trouble is that the books in question were placed under Justice League America, throwing a word into the title that is nowhere on these books. I understand that these two have the same writer/artist as was on the main title at the time but finding it would be near impossible without knowing that or looking for the title.

Hi, Randall-- I get it and, unfortunately, I'm learning to live with it, too -- but it really SLOWS things down when you have to stop and wonder 🤔, where is this thing going to be found in CB? Let's go on a scavenger hunt!

Although ComicBase is an amazing program and the defacto standard for cataloging a comic book/magazine/book collection, it suffers from a major defect and that is how titles are created, named, and maintained especially if a title ends and is restarted with a new number one adding it as part of a series. A classic simple example of this is DC Comics's Metal Men, e.g. Metal Men Metal Men (3rd Series) Metal Men (4th Series) Metal Men (Mini-Series) In the example above, Metal Men (Mini-Series) would ideally be Metal Men (2nd Series). However, there is an underlying decision that makes renaming Metal Men (Mini-Series) problematic, as described by Pete, and that is that the title name is used as the foreign key in, what I presume, is the Item table. This defect can make it difficult to locate a specific title, organize titles in order of their publication and often results in additional titles added for titles that already exist. Based on the comments of @Peter R. Bickford in the live stream of 4/13/2022, it seems that it is unlikely to change. I think that's a shame since organization is the major component of a database application. After giving this just a little bit of thought, I think this may be a starting point of a solution that could solve the problem. Caveat: I'm suggesting this without knowing the intricacies of the DB structure and would welcome input. I expect that moving forward with this will not only take time to mull over but to implement as well, but ultimately will make ComicBase an even greater product than it already is. Here's my take: Create a new field called DisplayTitle in the table that contains Title. Copy the values of the existing Title field into DisplayTitle. Use this DisplayTitle for searching and display. When a new title is created either by CB or a user, copy that value into the DisplayTitle field as well. If a DisplayTitle needs to be changed, CB verifies the new display title, changes it and voila, after the next update, the title can be found and sorted correctly. This would allow the implementation of a title naming standard perhaps using the indicia, year, and even the publisher of the title. Something like Metal Men (1993 Series) (DC) The benefit of this is if the standard changes, titles can be easily updated. This solution addresses some of the problems that @Peter R. Bickford brought up in the live stream. It doesn't violate the foreign key constraints between Title and Item. It easily allows for renaming the DisplayTitle if the indicia changes between solicitation and publication of the title. There is no requirement to shift data around in the tables and potentially mess up a user's data, since it's simply a DisplayTitle change. I'd love to see something like this implemented. --Walt

I'm wondering if newspapers could be spun off to their own section, separate from the Magazines section. As I mentioned earlier, I don't want to exclude magazines entirely. I would, however, exclude newspapers if I could. I can see where tracking all of that stuff in Human Computing's master database might be worthwhile for them, but I doubt many of us want to house a mega-database on our own systems. As ComicBase grows and expands well beyond comics, there may be a need to devise more ways for users to select the portions that meet their needs and exclude those that don't. I've got plenty of magazines related to comics and entertainment, but I don't need a newspaper index. I've got plenty of books, but I don't need an index of romance paperbacks or theological volumes.

Thanks for the catch! We've revved the setup sheet for the scanner here to remove any extra spaces that get inserted: https://www.comicbase.com/Support/CB_Wireless_Scanner_Easy_Setup.pdf The latest build of ComicBase (build 1669) also handles the issue. -Pete

There's also an additional benefit to this approach... it allows a user to define his own display name. It a setting is added to not override DisplayName, a user could easily maintain their own names.

That's my feeling as well for the same reason.

I think it's a great idea, I'm just afraid this is going to die on the vine and I'll be complaining about it again the next time I come across a crazy title.

It's worth noting that the confusion over incorrect and inconsistent titles in ComicBase cascades over to Atomic Avenue as well. So while we ComicBase users can figure things out and learn to work with them as they are, random shoppers using Atomic Avenue may not have a clue. It requires a bit extra to find issues of Donald Duck published by Gladstone, for example, if you don't realize that they will be listed under the title Donald Duck (Walt Disney's...) where the publisher is listed as Dell. I'm not yet selling on Atomic Avenue, but I imagine that more clarity and accuracy would positively affect sales. There are also seemingly random titles that are sometimes assigned to specials and FCBD comics. I've had difficulty finding some of those in the database. My most recent example: I just picked up a copy of a Doctor Who comic book that was exclusively released for the 2015 San Diego Comic Con. The cover logo only says Doctor Who, with 2015 Exclusive San Diego Comic Con International in the bottom corner. The indicia says Doctor Who: San Diego Comic Con Exclusive. I didn't find this among the existing Doctor Who entries, so I added it with the title from the indicia to my database. Only later did I accidentally stumble upon its existing entry: it's under Doctor Who: The Twelfth Doctor as #0. There are a few problems with this: (1) There is no "#0" anywhere on the actual comic book; (2) The San Diego comic does not precede the publication of #1--it came out around the time of #10; (3) Although the San Diego comic features the twelfth Doctor and is related to that series, the words The Twelfth Doctor appear nowhere in its title, unlike the series; and (4) While I might understand an argument for keeping the San Diego comic under this series as a Special Edition instead of #0, other Doctor Who convention specials are listed under their own titles, not as special editions of regular series, so there would still be a lack of consistency. It's a problematic, hard-to-find entry, yet I don't think it can be fixed without screwing up someone else's existing inventory. Publishers have definitely made a mess of things to untangle, and they are not themselves consistent, so discrepancies are bound to occur. I only wish they were easier to correct when pointed out, with some mechanism to transfer users' existing quantities to the corrected title or issue number. I understand that there are technological limitations in place, and circumventing them is well beyond me, but I hope someday this can be worked out.

I'm not sure if this was covered in an earlier video, I haven't watched the whole back catalog, but I think a good topic I would like to see a couple of examples of what a reviewer of submissions sees when reviewing submissions and how they process them. A couple of examples would be helpful - a wholly new issue, an edited Title description, an edited Notes, a newly-supplied Cover Artist, etc. What kinds of things are easily recognized, what kinds of things are best warned about ahead of time (and how to bring them up, and to whom).

Both the AA and the mobile app functions are pretty important, actually, especially as more items that were tracked in the original "single category" configuration of ComicBase get moved into the Magazine and Book categories.

We'll be posting revised CB2023 FREE Installer in about a hour that should be fix the problem.

Sorry, I meant to end sentences. they are valid in Name.

Okay. I will look into this and get back with you. However, for the 2nd printing, the Published by Bantam should be in the Notes. (Also, I doubt it is an actual 2nd printing but we will see). And I would suggest not to use periods (they can give the system problems at times).

Due to our Fiber installation for better internet last week; incoming emails we're either bouncing or being delayed. Adjustments have been made over the past few days to rectify it all.

The problem you are having with the pictures (not the speed) doesn't sound like it should be happening. You might give support a call and see if there is something that can fixed.

Mate yep your right it is

The title did actually change because there should not have been a space between the ellipsis and the closing parenthesis. There were also title name changes due to an Article being at the beginning (for example: 'The Mighty Utahn' and 'A Midsummer Night’s Dream (Manga Classics)' ) instead of at the end (for example: The Mighty Utahn, The and 'Midsummer Night’s Dream, A (Manga Classics)' ) In both cases, they were syntax / formatting errors that went against the standards.

So what is the threshold for it being "okay" to change a title? This week, I had two come back as Unrecognized Comic Titles. They were "Avatarex (Grant Morrison’s… )" and "Night Terrors: Graveyard Moon (John Carpenter’s… )". They were changed to "Avatarex (Grant Morrison’s…)" and "Night Terrors: Graveyard Moon (John Carpenter’s…)". I'l wait while you find the difference. SPOILERS BELOW.... Did you find it? Did you find that a single space after the ellipsis in each title was removed? A SINGLE SPACE. We changed two titles for a single space in the title. How is this acceptable but it is somehow not acceptable to change titles as mentioned in this thread to fix them so that they make some kind of sense? We have discussed how it might inconvenience some collectors and prevent them from getting updates to the titles that they own. Why inconvenience some collectors for the sake of a single space in a title but not others to make huge corrections to make the db follow some sensible order?

To make a shorter list, these are what I believe are the correct Titles. Except for the, probably, incorrect 2 extra issues in the 5th Series, I think this is all of them. CB Title Publisher Date Range Issue #s Cover dates Elf Lord (Night Wynd) 'Night Wynd (1980-1982) Issues 1-15 from Jun 1980 - ??? 1982 'Elflord' Aircel (1986) Issues 1-6 from Feb 1986 - Jul 1986 'Elflord (2nd Series)' 'Aircel (1986-1989) Issues 1-31 from Oct 1986 - Oct 1989 'Elflord (3rd Series)' 'Night Wynd (1992) Issues 1-4 from ??? 1992 - ??? 1992 (The Return of the King mini-series) 'Elflord (4th Series)' 'Night Wynd (1993) Issues 1-4 from ??? 1993 - ??? 1993 (The Summer's Magic mini-series) 'Elflord (5th Series)' 'Night Wynd (1993) Issues 1 from ??? 1993 (The Dragon's Eye one-shot (there should only be the 1 issue, I believe) 'Elflord (6th Series)' 'WaRP (1997) Issues 1-4 from Jan 1997 - Apr 1997 'Elflord (7th Series)' 'WaRP (1997-1998) Issues 1-7 from Sep 1997 - Mar 1998

Would love to see a "recent searches" history in the search bar ... perhaps like in Google Chrome, where you click on the search, you get a list of recent searches. Much easier when toggling between a few titles. Thanks! Tom

Instead of looking under My Comics, look under My Account. Scroll down and there should be a 'Known Databases' section. Use the drop-down box to select the correct database you want to remove, then click 'Remove'.

But, of course, that requires one to properly match your understanding of which type of item you are scanning with how it is currently entered in ComicBase...

Yeah, that is normal. Shiny foil and scanners don't play well together and the result is usually a darker image.

I understand that. What I am looking for is that same ability to exclude Magazines.

Thank you for this. I'm not a computer guy so I get lost in the jargon. I believe what you are suggesting is exactly what I have in mind. That said, it concerns me a bit that I had the same thought because HC has people trained in this and that have actually built all of this. Wouldn't they have already hit on it?

I watched the archived livestream last night. I thought Pete's explanation of the problem was clear, but I'm still not sure why something couldn't be implemented (as per Gregory's suggestions above) to make changes and allow users to accept them so we wouldn't have to settle for (and compound) past errors and inconsistencies. I completely understand not wanting to make users move all their inventory after a title correction--I don't want to do that! But can't it be automated, with an option to decline for those with a reason to do so? Their titles would then stand out as "unrecognized" after updates, but currently my titles stand out as unrecognized if I correct them. It seems somewhat analogous to the problem with OneDrive, which is something else that caused me a lot of grief. I eventually got it sorted out, but I spent a few hours going through the information, figuring out what to do, and fighting OneDrive to straighten it all out on my system. (It sounded simpler than it was.) The OneDrive situation was problematic for enough users that they've now devised a way for ComicBase to handle the move as long as you accept the action presented in a dialog box. That would have saved me some grief. Couldn't title and series corrections be handled with a similar approach? Display a dialog box and let the user decide if they want ComicBase to take action for them? From a technological view, the inability to correct titles in software designed for organization (without causing a lot of headaches for users) is a bug that should be fixed. From an archival view, the inclusion and perpetuation of inaccurate information is a strike against the product's credibility. From a capitalistic view, information presented incorrectly or inconsistently sometimes makes buying and selling more difficult, because you can't buy what you can't find. There are multiple good reasons to find a solution to this problem. It doesn't reflect well on an otherwise great product.

I *think* that in current practice the difference is that there is a function in the ComicBase program that allows you to change the media type of a title that you are viewing. This has the effect of allowing the user to shift their existing inventory for the old title that was in the incorrect media category to the new title that is in the correct media category. I suspect that this is relatively easy to program because the title name doesn't change at all, just the media category in which that title resides. For titles that get renamed, it's a little more complicated b/c you'd need to have a simple way for the user to point their inventory in the old version of the title to the new version since there are thousands of titles in the database... this is why I suggested that it might be easiest to do the inventory shift during the content update that actually adds the new version of the title. This isn't to say that the problem can't be solved, only that I am guessing that this is the reason why changing a title's name is more complicated than changing a title's format. (If I'm way off base on that, I am sure that @Peter R. Bickford can set the record straight!)

I definitely expected as much but I still think it's sad since ComicBase is the defacto comic book database. I realize that CB is nearing 30 years old but there is so much mess in it that it makes finding some things near impossible. One has to constantly think how some might have cataloged a title. Did they: Lop it on to the same title from another publisher (eg. Blondie) Throw multiple different titles under the same pot (eg. ... Spider-Man Comics Weekly #1-157 Super Spider-Man with the Super-Heroes #158-198 Super Spider-Man and the Titans #199-230 Super Spider-Man and Captain Britain #231-253 ( no title, number or date in the indicia) Super Spider-Man #254-310 Spider-Man Comic #311-333 The Spectacular Spider-Man Weekly #334-375 Spider-Man and Hulk Weekly #376-424 Spider-Man and Hulk Team-Up #425-449 Super Spider-Man TV Comic #450-499 Spider-Man #500-552 Spider-Man and His Amazing Friends #553-578 Spider-Man #579-633 The Spider-Man Comic #634-650 Spidey Comic #651-666 All this leads to is someone creating a new title because they can't find an existing one (e.g. Super Spider-Man and The Titans) Ignore the indicia and add it to the bottom of a different title. Not pay attention to how other titles were organized. In the case of Metal Men or Star Wars or titles that have multiple series, scroll through the list hoping that the logo on the comic associated with the title is representative enough that you choose the correct before trying again. One of the selling points that Pete, himself, makes is how labeling your comics makes it easier to organize and find them -- that may be true for a few titles but this lack of consistency makes that claim nearly preposterous in quite a few cases. Not know the start of a title and just guess locking the first issue in stone and making the addition of previous issues impossible (e.g. DC Coming Comics) And those are just a sample of the cases that I've come across. I have a monstrous collection that I want to organize and these inconsistencies make it difficult to do so. I can't believe that these issues can't be resolved in a database (which is really the point of a database and that is to resolve inconsistencies). I'm hoping the ultimate answer is not "well it's set in stone now" so we can't do anything about it. Because then everyone is at the whim and mercy of whomever enters a new title and all everyone can do is hope that they enter it correctly. That seems like the worst possible answer. --Walt

Randall is correct, changing longstanding titles now makes things problematic b/c existing users' inventory data would be turned into a mess. It's a legacy of a nomenclature decision that was made many many years ago when the re-re-re-relaunching of titles didn't happen and nobody could have predicted that it would become such a commonplace thing. I agree that designating repeated titles by volume # is much more cumbersome as compared to designating them by the year that they launched, and several sites already do this. (Marvel also does this when describing the contents of their trade paperback and hardcover collections.) Long ago (i.e., on the old CB msg boards) I suggested that this problem could be overcome if CB's content updates would (with the user's permission) move existing inventory to newly corrected titles... for example, if CB changed the existing Star Wars (1st series) to Star Wars (1977 series), then the update would give a pop-up window for the user to give permission for their old SW 1st series inventory to all be moved to the new SW 1977 series title. Nothing ever came of it, and my knowledge of programming is insignificant enough for me to have no clue as to whether my suggestion could actually be implemented. But if it could, it would allow CB to do a lot of clean-up that would make the program much more accessible to brand new users.

Hi Ronald, looking closer at your account, it doesn't look that you have linked your database that you use in ComicBase to your online account yet so you can add things to it (or view upload reports) through the mobile app. To do this, launch the ComicBase software, go to the File Menu>Collection Statistics; this step will do 2 things: give you your overall collection stats AND on the backend link your database to your online account/mobile app. Next time you restart the mobile app, you should see a database linked to it so you can add to it going forward. *To sync your mobile additions to your database, launch the ComicBase software, go the Internet Menu>Check for Sale and Purchases.

Currently only Collection Report and Item Checklists, Price List, and Wanted List have the ability to display Custom Fields (You can make a request for this to be different under Feature Suggestions.) However there is a way to get what you want with a few extra steps. This is to use the Marked box (you can't be using Marked for other things at the same time, though). 1) Run the find like you want. 2) Select All Items (CTRL+A is one easy way to do this). 3) Right-click and select Quick Change. 4) Change: 'Marked' To: 'Is Checked' Once the items are Marked you can: 5) Use Report-> (report type) where Report type is one of the Reports that allow Custom Fields (Collction Report or Item Checklists are probably the best) 6) On the Report window, check the boxes for 'List Only Marked Issues' and teh various 'Custom Fields' you want. (You can make other selections but you need to check at least these) 7)Run the Report. NOTE: You will need to Find the Marked Issues and change then to 'Unchecked' to clear the Marked field before using it for anything else that would look for Marked being Checked.

Scott J. Brown: Having just come across a Dynamic Forces book in my collection, it seems kind of cool to me. Why do you say they are EVIL?

Way back in the day, this thread on the old msg boards took a look at suspect valuations in the database for some of Warren's magazines. Eventually the prices on those issues were "right sized" (more or less) but over the years since then unusual drift on some of those issues seems to have returned. Particular issues that I would suggest get a second look at pricing would include: Creepy (Magazine) #3, #5, #8, #11, #17 (holy cow!), #64 (because it is too low rather than too high), #71 (wow!), #78, #80 (!!!), #81 (!!!), #82, #84, #89, #96, #123. And probably also #12, #15, #16, #39, #72, #92, #103, #108, #132, #133, #137, #138, #142. I am less certain of the current market values for #1 and #2, so truly high grade copies of those issues might fetch the prices shown in the database. Eerie (Warren) #3, #7 (too low), #9, #28, #38, #39, #48, #63, #79, #81 (too low). And probably #13, #15, #17, #23, #25, #42, #47, #67, #68, #71, #73, #75 through #78, #90 (too low), #116, #118 though #120, #122, #123, #138 (too low). Similar comment re: issues #1 and #2 as for Creepy. Vampirella (Magazine) #3 (priced higher than #1?), #50, #68 (too low), #96, #100, #104 (too low), #111 (too low). And probably #14, #15, #19, #30, #70, #73, #92, #102, #103, #106, Annual #1. If #113 is truly valued at $2.7K, why in the world is #113-A only valued at $5.00? If Special Edition #1 is valued at $255, how is it that Special Edition #1 HC is only valued at $12.50?

Looks like some adjusting took place. Thank you.

You assumption is correct. Since the cover scan was manually deleted (outside of CB) it has no reason to change the value. I would still contact support and see if they can figure out why your original database isn't updating the Picture Information.

I just checked my online backups and they're missing too, despite Sidekick saying there was a successful back on January 29th.

The downside of this decision is that I can't enter nor scan covers for prior issues that I have unless, by some miracle, a first issue is discovered for a title that doesn't have issue numbers nor indicia. The current starting item number of this title in ComicBase is 1 with a cover date of June 1988. I have seen online scans dating as far back as April 1985 (over 3 years earlier). If the current decision stands, I'm basically at a stand still entering this title and, quite frankly, it doesn't give me a lot of confidence going forward when I next hit a similar road block. I've already run into a situation in ComicBase where I had issues of a title (without indicia) whose numbering continued from another title yet was indexed under the original title. I had to research outside of ComicBase to discover what the original title might be -- which seems crazy. It was Super Spider-Man and Captain Britain which were indexed under Spider-Man Comics Weekly because that's where the numbering originated. A note says "Title sometimes known as Super Spider-Man". I don't know how that helps. At any rate, I'm feeling a little frustrated here.

Look at 'Wizard World Chicago Convention Program' or 'Baltimore Comic-Con Program' to see an example of what you could do.

Go into your Sidekick settings General Tab. Review the database(s) you have listed. Make sure the db(s) you mainly use is listed. *We think you might another db you don't use in the list; select and hit the 'minus' button to remove it from the list. See if Sidekick messages you afterwards.

The below pertain to how to enter new Titles. A discussion on how to enter the correct Publisher name (per how CB wants the name. How to name Titles that are a little out of the ordinary (example: Article placement, Aladdin (Disney’s…), containing '4-letter words', etc.)

Until this feature is implemented (if it is), here is one work-around. Do a Find for Qty in Stock >= 1. Once the results are displayed, select / hi-light multiple issues. Right-Click and select Download covers from the pop-up menu. NOTE: There is a limit (not sure what it is) on how many covers you can download at one time. Depending on the number of Items you have, you may have to do this several time.

Here is a first draft of information about the Advanced Find. Let me know if something needs to be added, deleted, modified, or explained better. ******************************************** I believe the database currently used by CB is SQLite. Here is a link to the SQL (Structured Query Language) for SQLite Select. https://www.sqlite.org/lang_select.html Here is a link to the Built-in Scalar SQL Functions https://www.sqlite.org/lang_corefunc.html Because of the limits put on Advance Find, a lot (most) of the SQLite documentation is of no use but it will get you the syntax for the ones you would use. (NOTE: I am supplying these links in case they help someone. Personally, I would use them as examples of how NOT to write a manual. I know what I am doing with SQL and I find these (while accurate) are to read/follow.) ******************************************** The Query functionality in the Advanced Find is limited to just the WHERE clause. You can't control the Select (what columns are returned), the From (the tables involved), or the Group By (used with Aggregate Functions like Sum, Count, Average, etc.). The main reason for this business decision is that every row returned has to be unique to allow them to be updated (changed) individually. Below are sections that are explained in more detail below: Data Types Comparisons Order By Random Notes ******************************************** DATA TYPES: To make it simple, there are just four Data Types (there are actually sub-types for some of these). Text: This is character data and can contain any alpha/numeric/special characters. All Text searches are case-insensitive (ignores case of letters). The constant compare value needs to be contained in single 'tick' marks (double 'tick' marks also work but single is the more standard way). I.[Title] = 'batman' This will return just the one Title 'Batman" as it is an exact match (and shows that Case doesn't matter) Date: This contains Date information. It has to be a valid date. (i.e. Feb 31, 2021 is NOT a valid date). Despite the display of the date in CB as m/d/YYY, the date in SQLite is in ISO standard format of YYYY-MM-DD. This is important because... I.CoverDate = '2020-12-01' will return rows (assuming there is data with that value). I.CoverDate = '12/1/2020' will NOT return any rows. Also it has to be an exact match as all the digits are important: I.CoverDate = '2020-12-1' will NOT return any rows. And like Text, Date constants need to be contained in single 'tick' marks. Number: This contains Numeric information (Integer or Decimal). I.QtyInStock = 2 I.IssueNum = 0.5 I.IssueNum = -1 Binary: This is represented by a Check-box. It is a True/False or 1/0 value. As you can see it has two states. Basically, it translates to 'Is Checked' or 'Is Not Checked'. These are equivalent and will return rows where the CustomCheck2 check-box IS Checked I.[CustomCheck2] IS True I.[CustomCheck2] = 1 And, as you might guess, change to False or 0 to find if a check-box Is Not Checked. ******************************************** COMPARISONS: When using the Where clause, you are normally comparing a Column value to a constant to find something. Some comparison operators are: = Equal To <> Not Equal To < Less Than > Greater Than <= Less Than or Equal To >= Greater Than or Equal To These work as you would expect: I.Title = 'Batman' (Finds Only exact match) I.Title <> 'Batman' (Finds All except 'Batman') I.Title < 'Batman' (Finds All from !Gag! (Harrier) to Baticomic) I.Title > 'Batman' (Finds ALL from 'Batman & Robin (Panini Deutschland)' to '…One to Go') I.Title <= 'Batman' (Same as < but also includes 'Batman') I.Title >= 'Batman' (Same as > but also includes 'Batman') BETWEEN: Syntax is BETWEEN x AND y It is inclusive (meaning the value of X and Y will be included in the results). It is equivalent to using the >= and <= together. For example, these produce the same results: I.IssueNum BETWEEN 5 and 10 I.IssueNum >= 5 AND I.IssueNum <= 10 Either of these will find all IssueNum values of 5, 6, 7, 8, 9, and 10 (assuming only integer values and the value exists). Note: X has to be Less than (or equal) to Y for it to work. This is easier to see if you use the >= and <= I.IssueNum BETWEEN 10 and 5 is equivalent to I.IssueNum >= 10 and I.IssueNum <= 5 There can't be a value that is both Greater than 10 and Less than 5 IN: Syntax is IN (value1, value2,...) Searches for a list of possible value instead of just one. It is equivalent to using multiple = comparisons. For example, these produce the same results: I.IssueNum IN (5, 8, 25, 32) (Note: the values can be in any order) I.IssueNum = 5 OR I.IssueNum = 8 OR I.IssueNum = 25 OR I.IssueNum = 32 Either will find all IssueNum values of 5, 8, 25 and 32. IS: This one is a little different it only has a couple formats: IS True IS False It is mainly used for Binary Data Types. (NOTE: there is also an IS NULL but that should rarely be needed. What is does is check to see if a column contains NULL. NULL is nothing. It is not a 'space' or an empty-string. Rarely, you may need it if a column in CB allows NULL and you need to find them.) LIKE: Syntax is I.Title LIKE 'Batman%' This will find values but uses wild-card symbols to allow finding non-exact matches. The wild-card values are Percent ( % ) and Underscore ( _ ) where a % represents zero to many characters and _ is one and only one character. (NOTE: You can use multiple _ in a row to indicate a specific number of characters.) Examples: I.Title LIKE '%Batman%' will find anything that contains 'Batman' in it (NOTE: Just because % is at the beginning doesn't mean that there has to be something in from of 'Batman' in the Title.) I.Title LIKE 'Bat%Man' will find anything that starts with 'BAT' and ends with 'MAN' and may or may not have other values between them. I.Title LIKE '_Batman' will find anything that that starts with a single character before 'Batman' (NOTE: There has to be a value as this will NOT return just 'Batman') I.Title LIKE '_atman' (one underscore) will return anything that starts with some single character and ends with 'atman' (i.e. 'Batman', 'Catman, 'Ratman') I.Title LIKE '__man' (two underscores) will return anything that starts with two characters and ends with 'tman' (i.e. 'Batman', 'Catman', 'Hitman', 'Ratman') I.Title LIKE '______' (six underscores) will return anything with 6 characters (i.e. '10 Gen','Action', Batman', 'Zordon', etc.) (There are also some NOT versions, like NOT BETWEEN, NOT IN, and IS NOT but NOT logic is best left to Expert Advanced users (or insane ones...). Having said that, they can be useful on occasion so I am at least mentioning them) Boolean Logic Expressions: The Where clause uses Boolean Logic Expressions. Besides the more familiar operators (<, >, =, etc.), it also includes AND, OR, and NOT. They are used to concatenate single comparisons into more complex comparisons. For the Where clause, the comparisons have to end up as TRUE to return rows. With AND, all comparisons have to be True for the Where clause to evaluate as True and return a row. With OR, at lest one comparison has to be True for the Where clause to evaluate as True and return a row. Here is a list to show how this works (the values True and False are being used as the comparisons to emulate the result of comparisons): AND- All have to be True: 'True' AND 'True' evaluates to TRUE , row returned. 'True' AND 'False' evaluates to FALSE, row NOT returned. 'False' AND 'True' evaluates to FALSE, row NOT returned. 'False' AND 'False' evaluates to FALSE, row NOT returned. OR- At least One has to be True: 'True' OR 'True' evaluates to TRUE , row returned. 'True' OR 'False' evaluates to TRUE , row returned. 'False' OR 'True' evaluates to TRUE , row returned. 'False' OR 'False' evaluates to FALSE, row NOT returned. This is also the case for more that two comparisons: 'True' AND 'True' AND 'True' evaluates to TRUE, row returned. 'True' AND 'True' AND 'False' evaluates to FALSE, row NOT returned 'True' OR 'False' OR 'True' evaluates to TRUE, row returned. 'False' OR 'False' OR 'False' evaluates to FALSE, row NOT returned. You can use both AND and OR in the same Where clause but you need to be aware of the Order of Precedence (the order the expressions are evaluated in). AND is processed before OR. To make it easier on you, it is best to use Parenthesis to control the order the comparisons are done. Consider this: I.Title = 'Batman' OR I.IssueNum = 2 AND I.Printing = 2 OR I.Variation = 'HC' I.Title = 'Batman' OR (I.IssueNum = 2 AND I.Printing = 2) OR I.Variation = 'HC' At first glance, the first one is hard to tell what is going to happen. The second one, with parenthesis, is what it actually being done. With the parenthesis, it is easier to see that it will return Any Batman rows, along with Any rows with IssueNum 2 & Printing 2, along with Any rows that have a Variation of HC. While it is still a complex query, it should be easier to understand what will happen. Here is another similar comparison where the only difference is the ANDs and ORs: I.Title = 'Batman' AND I.IssueNum = 2 OR I.Printing = 2 AND I.Variation = 'HC' (I.Title = 'Batman' AND I.IssueNum = 2) OR (I.Printing = 2 AND I.Variation = 'HC') Again, while both will return the same rows, with the parenthesis, it is easier to see that this will return Any Batman with IssueNum 2, along with Any row that has Printing 2 and Variation HC. ******************************************** ORDER BY: There isn't much to say about the Order By clause. It pretty much does what you would expect. Sorts the resutls as requested. The one thing not obvious is you can control the direction of the ordering with ASC (the default value) or DESC. I.Title ASC would sort A-Z and/or 0-100 (ASC is the default and you don't need to add it) I.Title DESC would sort Z-A and/or 100-0 You can mix and match the use of ASC and DESC I.Title ASC, I.IssueNum Desc I.Title Desc, I.IssueNum Desc, I.Variation ASC Keep in mind the Data types when doing sorts. Number and Dates sort as you would expect. Text sorts characters from left to Right. If you have what looks like numbers in a Text field, the sort order would be 1, 10, 100, 2, 20, 200, etc. It would not be 1, 2, 10, 20, 100, 200. The following will sort the results the same way (or at least very similar) to the way CB sorts its display: I.Title, I.IssueNum, I.ItemType, I.Variation, I.Printing ******************************************** [start 2022-01-14 addition] DATA TYPES: Strftime: Strftime allows you to access a date in different ways. The basic syntax is: strftime(format, column-name) Some of the more useful formats are: %m month: 01-12 %d day of month: 00 %w day of week 0-6 with Sunday=0, Saturday=6 %Y year: 0000-9999 NOTE: the format character is case-sensitive. Use upper/lower case as shown. The Month format is probably the most useful as it can be used with both CoverDate and StreetDate. While Day of Month and Day of Week can be used with either, most CoverDate Day values are 1 (excepting items put out multiple times a month) and wont' really get you useful results. While the Year function does work, it is not as efficient as using BETWEEN: strftime('%Y', I.CoverDate) = '2002' takes 23 seconds to process I.CoverDate BETWEEN '2022-01-01' and '2022-12-31' takes 1.75 seconds to process You can also combine this with the BETWEEN function to limit the year ranges for a result. Some examples: Find all items with a day of '15': strftime('%d', I.StreetDate) = '15' Find all items with a day of '15' for years 2000-2009: strftime('%d', I.StreetDate) = '15' AND I.CoverDate BETWEEN '2000-01-01' AND '2009-12-31' Find all items with a day of Wednesday': strftime ('%w', I.StreetDate) = '03' [end 2022-01-14 addition] ******************************************** RANDOM NOTES: What is Item # and why not to use it in Order By: While Item # is the displayed value, it isn't the best field to do Finds with, in most cases. Item # is composed of 4 other columns. They are, in order, ItemType, IssueNum, Variation, and Printing. Item # 1/HC-2 is composed of: ItemType: none used (or regular issue but don't try to find regular issue in ItemType as it is only a display item) IssueNum: 1 Variation: HC Printing: 2 If you try to use Item # in the Order by, it will sort all ItemTypes first. Also, Item # is a Text field and NOT a numeric. You will also get 1, 10, 100-109, 11, 110-119, 12, 120-... This is why it is better to use the various components of the Item # instead of Item # itself when sorting to match CB order: I.Title, I.IssueNum, I.ItemType, I.Variation, I.Printing ====== Use of [] in Column names: Some of you may be curious what the brackets ( [] ) around column names are for (and why I don't use them). If the creator of a Table use a column name with a space (i.e. 'Issue Number') then it is required to enclose it in brackets ( [Issue Number] ) when referencing it so the database sees it has a 'single' name. If there is no space (i.e. IssueNumber), then the brackets are optional. Since the SQL processor adding the columns doesn't know if there are spaces or it, it defaults using brackets, just in case. It doesn't hurt to have them and not need them. However, to me, they just clutter up the display of the query (the less I have to look at and ignore, the better) so I never type them in when I write a query. A similar point could be made for parenthesis. Most SQL processors put way too many, unnecessary parenthesis in their statement. Don't get me wrong. As I showed above, parenthesis can (and sometimes must) be used to make the query either easier to understand or do what you want. But the over-use of them can make for a cluttered query. (Okay, my pet peeve part of this manual is over (for now...)) ====== [end 2021-12-30 addition to cover different Types and Columns] How to use Publisher Title columns in Advanced Find: One thing you may notice, is that only ISSUE columns are available in Advanced Find in the drop-down box. In the old days (pre-CB 2020) there used to be "I" (Issue tables) and "T" (Title tables) where you could access Publisher in Advanced Find. The "I" and "T" were qualifiers to indicate which table a column is in. --- Quick aside (geek alert)... The "I" in I.Title is the qualifier (or identifier) of a Table as defined in a From clause (since the From clause has not been displayed, you can see it directly). It is only really needed if you have more than one Table in the From and you Join them together (i.e. Issue table and Title table). The syntax would look like this: From Issue_Table I inner join Title_Table T on I.Title = T.Title The only thing you need to get from this is that the column Title is in both Tables. Because of this it needs to be qualified when reference (i.e. I.Title for the one int the Title_Table) --- Sadly, with CB 2020, only "I" table columns are (readily) available. However, there is a second way to qualify a column and that is with the actual Table name. So, while you can't select Publisher from the drop-down box, you CAN use it by qualifying it with the actual table name like this: ComicTitles.Publisher = 'Marvel' BookTitles.Publisher = 'Ballantine' MagazineTitles.Publisher = 'Time' ComicTitles.[CustomCheck1] IS TRUE BookTitles.[CustomCheck1] IS TRUE MagazineTitles.[CustomCheck1] IS TRUE NOTE: This is a non-supported feature which may or may not work in future releases of CB. (Maybe HC will make Title columns available in the Advanced Find in the future (hint, hint, hint, please...?) [start 2021-12-30 addition to cover different Types and Columns]

Thanks for that. The problem was specific to counting the results of the "Current value" where conditions weren't NM. Fixed in build 1858, available now.