Fred Slota

Okay, let's get practical here. How are we handling this going forward? I propose the following for entering new issues: 1) If the bag has a unique UPC, it is entered as a single variant issue separate from the unbagged issues (regardless of if the included issue is a single, known cover or a random selection from multiple covers) 2) If the bag contains an unknown random cover, it is entered as a single variant issue separate from the unbagged issues. 3) If the bag contains a known, fixed cover (either opaque but with only one cover that is bagged, or transparent and the cover can be identified), it is entered as a separate printing of the unbagged issue. 4) If the bag contains an unknown, random insert, the bagged variant or printing is entered only once (regardless of how many random inserts exist). 5) If the bag contains a known insert, the bagged variant or printing is entered as multiple separate printings for each of the possible known inserts. The cover scan should show the insert. I think this covers all possible scenarios with the current system.

First, I'm running 20.0.1.2734, and when I do "Items | Find", I have options for "Released this Week" and "Released last Week". Second, you can choose to search for the Issue Field "Cover Date" or "Street Date", and then pick a date (or dates) from the provided calendar tool. Third, you can use Advanced Find, including "Cover Date" or "Street Date" in the "Items Where..." field. The trick with this is, for SQL searches, you need to provide date values, dash separated , enclosed in single quotes, as in 'yyyy-mm-dd', like: I.[CoverDate] > '2019-03-01' To find all issues with provided CoverDates greater than March 1, 2019. Excelsior!

Just a friendly note, this might wait a few days before being addressed. The office is closed through 1/2/2020. Sorry I can't be helpful.

Obviously, I would prefer the real cover over a preliminary or no cover, but I, for one, would rather have a preliminary cover over no cover.

Soooooo, can we revisit the case of Detective Comics #700-SC? The issue comes with a removable cardstock outer wrapper. There is still only a single entry for this book, and the scan is still the front of the removable outer wrapper. The actual issue has a cover image of the face of Ra's al Ghul with minimal additional dressing or badging, and so is different from the other entries for issue 700 variants.

Don't get me wrong, I'm ecstatic about this, but my mind is blown! So, for multiple reasons, I've been nearly 7 years since doing a merge new books with the full archive, and coupled with the new version of ComicBase, I'm doing a full walkthrough of everything. The ability to scroll through only my owned issues is great, but I missed something for a while because of it. I'm finally in the B's and when I hit Batman Adventures #6, and I was passing over the fact that my issue is still bagged, while the official scan was ubagged, I noticed that the notes indicated that the Trading card was missing. That made me curious, so I changed the setting to see all issues, and lo and behold, there was a separate entry for the sealed issue, complete with scan! When did that happen? I remember bringing this suggestion up and having forum conversations multiple times over many years. I just dug through the archived forum and found a thread from basically 2 years ago on this subject, where it seemed that this was still not going to be a thing. Now I have to look at those first 10 boxes all over again...

So, if they're initially late, that's it for 2-3 months? Would it be possible to add to your weekly process to check if any of these future issues that missed prelims the first time around are now available?

Again, "at the time early solicitation info is released" is what, 2, 3 months ahead of when the book actually hits the stand. That's what, 7, 11 ComicBase update cycles after that. If not provided at solicitation, are covers, if only preliminary, not provided at some later point, and so able to be pushed in any of the later update cycles, so that by the time a book hits the stand, a cover image would be available in ComicBase?

I think the cover scan for The Adventurers (Book 1) #2, published by Adventure, is an incorrect duplicate of The Adventurers (Aircel) #2. I myself apparently have 2 copies of the Aircel, 1 in each location, and none of the Adventure.

Wrong cover, duplicate of 1/A

Mike, I think you are describing a completely different phenomenon. I'm describing building a SQL statement in the "Items Where..." or "Order By" fields in the "Items | Find | Advanced Find" dialog and using the "Fields" drop-down to add another field to the clause. I think you are describing something completely different. If you thought you were saying that what I was describing was not happening for you, then I think you have missed my point. If you instead were trying to describe a different odd behavior that you wanted to suggest a change to, I suggest so that you open a separate forum topic.

It seemed to me that there were multiple issues that came out this week that didn't have prelim artwork already. Both my examples were specifically chosen because they had preliminary artwork for subsequent as-yet unreleased issues. They solicit what, 2-3 months ahead? You push updates weekly. I suppose it is possible, but do you get gaps like this often, on major titles, from major publishers?

Yep.

Maybe it's just me, but the highlighting of owned issues in grid view on my laptop is too subtle unless I'm viewing at just the right angle. Might highlight shade have a few options, or possibly a palette choice in Themes? Rather than tweaking fixed shades for something that amounts to personal opinions, I suggest some form of setting, either a lighter/darker slider while keeping the general theme shade, or a fully separate color palette selection.

On the Advanced Find subwindow, a link/button that provides some SQL help and ComicBase data help would be helpful. Stuff like: working with text vs. numbers vs. dates which fields are which data types Boolean conditions How to sort like ComicBase Sample searches Excelsior! (Are you sick of my, what would you call it, forum-storm of posts, yet?)

Add a custom sort order field, so the Set can be arranged in particular orders. Add an import/export, so Human Computing and other users can collaborate and share. Thus we could make some interesting sets... Major storylines. Crossovers. Legacy numbering. Linked covers. Consecutive character appearances. Some things just can't be built from a clever Advanced Find search... Excelsior!

How about adding a preference when switching to a new title, focus on last owned regular issue instead of the first entry. Additional suggestion - Add a button to the main page that will take you to the last owned regular issue. Maybe it could be placed to the right of the Next Title button? I realize that there is now a functioning jump feature, F3, but this still requires a) manual interaction and b) knowledge of what the number is.

I was browsing in my archives, and I found a "CB_Cover_Gallery" screen saver from 2009 that still runs. It is version 12.1.0.0. Does anyone have any additional information on this?

Come on, guys, add this to Sidekick... You have a massive library of images, and yes, there are third-party programs out there that can use them for these purposes (although, not many that will operate easily with the large number of nested folders), but you have the ability to integrate your picture library with your database. You can have a filter that avoids adult titles. You can have a filter that shows only in-stock issues. You can caption pictures with Title, issue#, Cover date, Price. You can include the Notes field. For stores, you could show the price. For stores, you could filter for sale items. Excelsior!

ComicBase 2020, File Tools, Rebuild Lists. I checked all the boxes. I start the process. Chug. Chug. Chug. CLUNK! "Clear all previous picture references before rebuilding?" Sure would have been nice to have been asked this question at the start so I could simply fire-and-forget the whole process.

How about a field with the Item Code that would link to the website?

Subscriptions, Preorders, Orders... Probably a tall order, given differing Title identifications and Issue identifications... One can dream...

Vampirella Quarterly currently has 7 titles, which currently alphabetically sort as: Vampirella Quarterly: Fall 2007 Vampirella Quarterly: Halloween 2008 Vampirella Quarterly: Spring 2007 Vampirella Quarterly: Spring 2008 Vampirella Quarterly: Summer 2007 Vampirella Quarterly: Summer 2008 Vampirella Quarterly: Winter 2008 Wouldn't it be nicer if the AlphabeticTitle field could be appropriately mangled to produce: Vampirella Quarterly: Spring 2007 Vampirella Quarterly: Summer 2007 Vampirella Quarterly: Fall 2007 Vampirella Quarterly: Spring 2008 Vampirella Quarterly: Summer 2008 Vampirella Quarterly: Halloween 2008 Vampirella Quarterly: Winter 2008 I don't know if this comes up anywhere else... Excelsior!

Can the insert be changed to take place at the cursor position, instead of at the end of the text entry field?

Several years ago, I made a suggestion for a change in the alphabetizing rules that was eventually incorporated into ComicBase, merging the sorting of related titles with both Volume and Series numbering. (For example, look at the multiple Titles for the Avengers...) I would like to propose a similar adjustment to clean up a similar situation; The alphabetizing of titles with numeric words in the title. This suggestion has two parts, both of which are exemplified in the various Doctor Who titles. As a start, look at these titles: Doctor Who: The Eleventh Doctor Doctor Who: The Eleventh Doctor Year Three Doctor Who: The Eleventh Doctor Year Two Notice how the second and third titles, while they are in alphabetical order, are not in useful order. They are sorted on the AlphabetizedTitle field, which for these three titles is: DoctorWhoTheEleventhDoctor DoctorWhoTheEleventhDoctorYearThree DoctorWhoTheEleventhDoctorYearTwo I propose that when the AlphabetizedTitle field is being generated, it search for numerical words and substitute an appropriate zero-padded numeral. In this case, it would produce: DoctorWhoTheEleventhDoctor DoctorWhoTheEleventhDoctorYear00002 DoctorWhoTheEleventhDoctorYear00003 And thus sort the titles as: Doctor Who: The Eleventh Doctor Doctor Who: The Eleventh Doctor Year Two Doctor Who: The Eleventh Doctor Year Three That's the easy part. Here's the hard part. Look at these titles (I'm picking and choosing to better show my point): Doctor Who: The Eighth Doctor Doctor Who: The Eleventh Doctor Doctor Who: The Fourth Doctor Doctor Who: The Ninth Doctor Doctor Who: The Tenth Doctor Doctor Who: The Third Doctor Doctor Who: The Twelfth Doctor Notice how all the titles, while they are in alphabetical order, are not in useful order. They are sorted on the AlphabetizedTitle field, which for these seven titles is: DoctorWhoTheEighthDoctor DoctorWhoTheEleventhDoctor DoctorWhoTheFourthDoctor DoctorWhoTheNinthDoctor DoctorWhoTheTenthDoctor DoctorWhoTheThirdDoctor DoctorWhoTheTwelfthDoctor I propose that when the AlphabetizedTitle field is being generated, it search for ordinal words and substitute an appropriate zero-padded numeral that will sort separately from regular numbers, such as 0th0xxxx. In this case, it would produce: DoctorWhoThe0th0003Doctor DoctorWhoThe0th0004Doctor DoctorWhoThe0th0008Doctor DoctorWhoThe0th0009Doctor DoctorWhoThe0th0010Doctor DoctorWhoThe0th0011Doctor DoctorWhoThe0th0012Doctor And thus sort the titles as: Doctor Who: The Third Doctor Doctor Who: The Fourth Doctor Doctor Who: The Eighth Doctor Doctor Who: The Ninth Doctor Doctor Who: The Tenth Doctor Doctor Who: The Eleventh Doctor Doctor Who: The Twelfth Doctor (Note: Text searching should probably look for space-padded words, i.e. " four ", and not "four") There will be some shifts of titles in addition to resorting - For example, all of the above will move to being ahead of the title "Doctor Who: The Betrothal of Sontar". This will probably need a little more research for possible unusual cases; fractions, multi-word numbers. Thoughts?