 |
|
|
|
Welcome to the Invelos forums. Please read the forum
rules before posting.
Read access to our public forums is open to everyone. To post messages, a free
registration is required.
If you have an Invelos account, sign in to post.
|
|
|
|
|
Invelos Forums->DVD Profiler: Contribution Discussion |
Page:
1 2  Previous Next
|
|
Star Wars : Rebels |
|
|
|
|
|
| Author |
Message |
| Registered: October 30, 2011 | Reputation:  |  Posts: 1,870 |
| | Posted: | | | | With the way this thread is going I am just glad "C1-10PR aka "Chopper" / / -> Himself" doesn't have accents  |
| | Registered: May 8, 2007 | | Posts: 824 |
| | Posted: | | | | Quoting JMGuer: Quote:
Look, I actually agree with you in regards to database functions such as linking, which is precisely why I create my own profiles and don't download.
Failing that, there is always your local database (most importantly) in which you can enter data as you see fit ( as you know). A win-win situation as I see it. Really. A user who buys the program, downloads profiles, and ends up with broken searching, linking, sorting, and filtering, is a "win" situation. Really. | | | | 99.9% of all cat plans consist only of "Step 1." |
| | Registered: March 29, 2007 | | Reputation: |  Posts: 4,479 |
| | Posted: | | | | Quoting JMGuer: Quote:
A win-win situation as I see it. Only for people who have time to spend on this program. I'm retired, and my collection links perfectly. My son and my gender just download profiles, and when they click on an actor, they just get partial lists of what they really own. In fact both are really considering to change to another program. In fact they love the program, but the database is a mess. | | | | Images from movies |
| | Registered: June 1, 2013 |  Posts: 217 |
| | Posted: | | | | Quoting Grendell: Quote:
Quoting JMGuer:
Quote:
Look, I actually agree with you in regards to database functions such as linking, which is precisely why I create my own profiles and don't download.
Failing that, there is always your local database (most importantly) in which you can enter data as you see fit ( as you know). A win-win situation as I see it.
Really.
A user who buys the program, downloads profiles, and ends up with broken searching, linking, sorting, and filtering, is a "win" situation.
Really. err, no...not what I said. I'll spell it out... a user who buys the program, downloads no profiles. "enters data as he sees fit" (ie: creates his own profiles from scratch), ends up with no "broken searching, sorting, and filtering", yes a win situation.Absolutely. ...thus my comment to surfeur51....not happy with the online database?, can't get a rule you don't like changed? = easy (if you have lots of time on your hands, and I think he does), just ignore the online database and enter data as he sees fit into his local....no more worries about linking, sorting, filtering functions.... easy as a,b,c...1,2,3.... | | | | Last edited: by JMGuer |
| | Registered: March 29, 2007 | | Reputation: | | Posts: 4,479 |
| | Posted: | | | | Quoting Kathy: Quote:
I've seen animals do a better job acting than some humans!  You are right. That is the reason why best actors/actresses awards are often given to animals at Oscar, Golden Globe, BAFTA, and all festivals all around World...  | | | | Images from movies |
| | Registered: June 1, 2013 | | Posts: 217 |
| | Posted: | | | | Quoting surfeur51: Quote:
Quoting JMGuer:
Quote:
A win-win situation as I see it.
Only for people who have time to spend on this program. . Yes, this is true, which in your case shouldn't be a problem. |
| | Registered: March 29, 2007 | | Reputation: | | Posts: 4,479 |
| | Posted: | | | | Quoting JMGuer: Quote:
... which in your case shouldn't be a problem. When I have time, I prefer watch a movie than filling its profile. The best situation would be a correct database, so that each user would get useful data when downloading profiles. It is very frustrating to see the best movie program partially ruined by the worst database (in fact it is not a database, it is a collection of erratic data). | | | | Images from movies |
| | Registered: June 1, 2013 | | Posts: 217 |
| | Posted: | | | | Quoting surfeur51: Quote:
Quoting JMGuer:
Quote:
... which in your case shouldn't be a problem.
When I have time, I prefer watch a movie than filling its profile. The best situation would be a correct database, so that each user would get useful data when downloading profiles. It is very frustrating to see the best movie program partially ruined by the worst database (in fact it is not a database, it is a collection of erratic data). Yes, that would be the best situation, but do you realistically think that will ever happen? Some users seem pretty satisfied with the way things are. Then you get down to what is the "correct database" as people will have different opinions on what "correct" is. Your definition of "correct" could be miles apart from that of some other user. Bringing up the faults, as you see them, of the online database in various threads appears to have no effect. Thus my suggestion in trying to get rules changed, if you can...failing that,,,,(see above post). I do understand your point. Your local links perfectly as you stated above. You would like it to do so for everybody. Commendable. Problem is everyone will have a different opinion on how to do it. Any ultimate solution may not be to your liking. I knew from an earlier post of yours that you were retired, thus my comment about ignoring the online db and manually entering your own profiles into your local. In my case time is no problem. I retired at 50 (am now 62), so manually entering 10-15,000 movies into my local database is no problem for me. Also it is someting that I have been doing for a long time (VHS era and even before) and enjoy doing. Yes, I realize that not everyone is in the same boat, thus my comment was directed towards you and no one else. | | | | Last edited: by JMGuer |
| | Registered: March 29, 2007 | | Reputation: | | Posts: 4,479 |
| | Posted: | | | | Quoting JMGuer: Quote:
Then you get down to what is the "correct database" as people will have different opinions on what "correct" is. It is basic and simple : one "object" = one, and only one, identifier If you don't have this, you don't have a "database", since no "database function" can work. | | | | Images from movies |
| | Registered: June 1, 2013 | | Posts: 217 |
| | Posted: | | | | Quoting surfeur51: Quote:
Quoting JMGuer:
Quote:
Then you get down to what is the "correct database" as people will have different opinions on what "correct" is.
It is basic and simple :
one "object" = one, and only one, identifier
If you don't have this, you don't have a "database", since no "database function" can work. Yes, an identifier, something you and I both use in our locals....this ground has been covered before... Post of mine from April 17, where someone suggest using an identifier such as FT24587 Quoting JMGuer: Quote:
Quoting surfeur51:
Quote:
Quoting emmeli:
Quote:
Quoting surfeur51:
Quote:
Is it easier to link Joan Sampson to FT24587 than to Joan Smith ? I do not think so.
but it is. you have change one (1) profil for FT24587 after she has married again. the result is, that all profiles get this update and no more discuss for any common name.
I agree with that , and that is why I'm in favor of a new system.
But, once again, I think this will never happen, and even if it happens one day, we have still thousands of variants without any common name thread to link. With my proposal, those links would be easy to create very quickly. Doing nothing with rules means we'll wait until the new system is implemented to begin to work on those thousands of non linking names.
At a local level, this is very achievable and easy to do (assuming the interest/passion is there) you simply designate cast/crew with the same name as (I), (II), etc.
Tony Curtis (I): Some Like it Hot
Tony Curtis (II): Something About AJ
Carleton Young (I): No Escape
Carleton Young (II): His Kind of Woman
You can have 10,000 DVDs/films in your database....300,000 cast/crew...every entry will be correct and properly linked.
Actress Jane Doe (I) decides to change her name to Jane Dow...and you want to change it in your local to reflect this, no problem, all you need to do is change one entry and the other 50
titles you have with her in them will change automatically...always linked.
Since you are the only one entering data into your local you will never have a case of improperly linked names.
You buy a new DVD with Carleton Young in it....real easy to find out (assuming you don't already know this info, eg.: visual recognition of said actor) which Carleton Young it is, (I) or (II)
No need to fuss over common names, birth years, credited as.....Tony Curtis (I) is Tony Curtis (I) is Tony Curtis (I)....makes no difference that he was credited as Anthony Curtis in a couple of his early movies...makes no difference what year he was born in....Tony Curtis (I) is Tony Curtis (I). Infallible.
Be it (I), (II) or FT24587, FT24588 or whatever, the idea is the same......but one will always need to determine (make an effort to find out) which name is which Your reply Quoting surfeur51: Quote:
Quoting JMGuer:
Quote:
At a local level, this is very achievable and easy to do (assuming the interest/passion is there) you simply designate cast/crew with the same name as (I), (II), etc.
Of course, you are right. As for me, I prefer to use fake BY, I find it looks better in the actors list window.
But the problem is not local. Many fans have a correct linking for them, but all this work (made several times in parallel) is useless for average users who have not more time than just download their profiles from the online database. And those just get all the errors requested by rules. Roman numerals for me (looks better), fake BY for you (looks better). I guess the trick is getting people to agree on what the identifier should be and a will to implement it. Good luck. Anyway, I've spent more time on this than I intended...and to anyone who says: if you don't use the online db (I don't) why would you care (I don't)...you would be right... |
| | Registered: March 20, 2007 | | Reputation: | | Posts: 2,852 |
| | Posted: | | | | Quoting CubbyUps: Quote:
If we actually went by that definition than only humans would be allowed in the cast section.
Not only would non-alive cast not be allowed but neither would animal cast members. Gone would be Buck from Married with Children, Lassie from the Lassie films or all the dogs in Eight Below to name just a few. Why is that a problem? --------------- |
| | Registered: May 8, 2007 | | Posts: 824 |
| | Posted: | | | | Quoting JMGuer: Quote:
Yes, that would be the best situation, but do you realistically think that will ever happen? Some users seem pretty satisfied with the way things are. You truly believe that this: Quoting JMGuer: Quote:
a user who buys the program, downloads no profiles. "enters data as he sees fit" (ie: creates his own profiles from scratch), ends up with no "broken searching, sorting, and filtering", yes a win situation. ...represents the majority of users? | | | | 99.9% of all cat plans consist only of "Step 1." |
| | Registered: March 13, 2007 | Reputation:  | | Posts: 13,202 |
| | Posted: | | | | Quoting scotthm: Quote:
Quoting CubbyUps:
Quote:
If we actually went by that definition than only humans would be allowed in the cast section.
Not only would non-alive cast not be allowed but neither would animal cast members. Gone would be Buck from Married with Children, Lassie from the Lassie films or all the dogs in Eight Below to name just a few.
Why is that a problem?
--------------- I am guessing it is a problem because there are people who like to have that information. | | | No dictator, no invader can hold an imprisoned population by force of arms forever.
There is no greater power in the universe than the need for freedom.
Against this power, governments and tyrants and armies cannot stand.
The Centauri learned this lesson once.
We will teach it to them again.
Though it take a thousand years, we will be free.
- Citizen G'Kar |
| | Registered: March 20, 2007 | | Reputation: | | Posts: 2,852 |
| | Posted: | | | | Quoting TheMadMartian: Quote:
Quoting scotthm:
Quote:
Why is that a problem?
I am guessing it is a problem because there are people who like to have that information. We can put whatever cast and crew we want in our local databases. --------------- |
| | Registered: June 1, 2013 | | Posts: 217 |
| | Posted: | | | | Quoting Grendell: Quote:
Quoting JMGuer:
Quote:
a user who buys the program, downloads no profiles. "enters data as he sees fit" (ie: creates his own profiles from scratch), ends up with no "broken searching, sorting, and filtering", yes a win situation.
...represents the majority of users? No. Never claimed it did. It represents me. I know that my English isn't perfect...but come on. Take things in the context of the full post. What part of "I realize that not everyone is in the same boat, thus my comment was directed towards you and no one else." do you not understand? My posts were directed to surfeur51, not the "majority of users" For your info, since you seem to care:I am perfectly happy/unhappy with the online databse. I have no complaints about it. I do not use it. Re: "following rules" in regards to DVDP. I follow the rules I have set up for myself religiously. I never deviate from them. Even if Invelos implements the actor/crew identifier that surfeur51 brought up, I still would not use the online profiles. The reasons are many.... Errors in the database The order in which cast is listed (for me: as credited in the film, beginning credits first in order, minor players in the end credits last, in alphabetical order) I do not list animals, props, cartoons, puppets as cast in my local db, even if credited on screen I list some crew/omit some crew that the online does not I list titles of films often at odds with the way they are shown in the online Release dates (or in Invelosspeak, production years) are often at odds I do not use parent/child profiles....one film = one profile I only enter a film once (one profile per title), multiple editions of same film get denoted in 'notes' The names of cast/crew members often at odds with online I enter full production company credits, full country of origin credits, unlike the online I do not use DVD covers. I use extra large film posters for the "front cover", extra large cards with a photo montage of cast and crew for the "rear cover" I do not enter any info pertaining to the DVD (maybe sacrilegious to some, holy to me), in other words ...DVD release - blank ...Case Type - blank ...SRP - blank ...Edition - blank ...DVD Features - blank ...Disc Info - blank ...UPC - blank ....and other reasons I can't think of right now. But even if the online was identical to the above, I probably would still do manual profiles simply because I like doing them. Do I think the above represents the majority or even one other user? No. It represents me. Am I suggesting that Invelos implement changes to the program that might affect others? No. I am suggesting that you do what I do? No. Am I suggesting the above is the best way to do it? Well, for me it is. How you create your local db is your concern. |
| | Registered: May 8, 2007 | | Posts: 824 |
| | Posted: | | | | Quoting JMGuer: Quote:
No. Never claimed it did. It represents me. "I never said..." "I never said..." "I never said..." "I never said..." "I never said..." "I never said..."   | | | | 99.9% of all cat plans consist only of "Step 1." |
|
|
|
Invelos Forums->DVD Profiler: Contribution Discussion |
Page:
1 2 Previous Next
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
 |