Moderator Warning - Needs Clarification

This evening, I received the following mod warning:

For images: scan + digital copy = both allowed

Do not try to confuse mods by reporting a the actual scanned paper version as a duplicate of the digital copy

Sorry, not to come off like a smart-aleck, but I really don't understand this. Can a moderator contact me for clarification, please?

Thanks!

Basically when it comes to editorials, aka photoshoots done for magazines, there are two versions of the pictures. One is the "digital" copy which basically means the HQ version that has no text and usually is less cropped. Then there is the scanned version, which means the version taken straight from the magazine, and this has in the past always been done manually (a person gets the magazine in their hand and then uses a scanner to get it onto the computer). But as technology grows, scanned versions can be digital also, aka come straight from the computer so it's higher quality.

Generally moderators allow both the digital copies and a set of the scans if the scans were done manually (so not the digital versions of the scans).

Hope that made some sense.

@Maggie

But as technology grows, scanned versions can be digital also, aka come straight from the computer so it's higher quality.

Generally moderators allow both the digital copies and a set of the scans if the scans were done manually (so not the digital versions of the scans).

Sorry, I'm reading this but I'm confused! :)
To be clear, is it be OK if we post a scanned version from a web link?
Or, do you accept only scans we scanned ourselves and upload from the PC?

Maggie, is this the same ruling as "the picture used for a magazine cover and the magazine cover itself aren't considered duplicates?"

^ Yes, the same rule applies, unless it is some crappy tabloid reprint.

@ The OP - It doesn't have to be something you scanned yourself, it just has to be scanned by someone somewhere at some point. Make sense?

So, this cover from Time magazine's web site would be a no-no, because it's obviously not scanned. Did I get it right?

Covers are on their own level; we allow them regardless of how they were added.

When I get on a computer I'll try to find some good examples.

Legit major magazine covers are always allowed, regardless.

People often use covers for lists.

The point is that we just don't want useless duplicate images that contribute nothing to a gallery. Obviously a Time Magazine cover is significant and contributes to a gallery.

Now, if it were a silly tabloid cover claiming some ridiculous nonsense like the Obamas are getting a divorce or that Obama is a vampire or something, I would delete it. If a user wants to upload that sort of silly stuff, it should be uploaded to their personal profile gallery.

Here is an example of something that is not acceptable

We don't need both this digital quality image - www.listal.com/viewimage/6185440
and this digital magazine page - www.listal.com/viewimage/6185441

Here is an example of something that is Acceptable
this scan from the actual pages of Vogue - www.listal.com/viewimage/5702518
and this Digital copy of the image from Vogue.com - www.listal.com/viewimage/5765871

OK, thanks, now I get it :)