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->Posts by scotthm Page: 1 2 3 4  Previous   Next
Message Details
Quoting GSyren:
Quote:
So if we do determine the country of origin (through research), do we ignore the "letter of the law" and enter it even though it may not actually be in the credits?

The Rules are for Ken's online database.  That's how he wants data entered into his online database.  We can do whatever we want to locally.

If Ken really has a problem with a lot of CoO fields being unpopulated he is free to change The Rules at any time.

---------------
Posted:
Topic Replies: 19, Topic Views: 1385
Quoting GSyren:
Quote:
But here's the thing - some movies don't have any studio listed. So if we are to follow the rule exactly, we should not assign any CoO, even though we may know where the movie was made. But is that reasonable?

Yes it is reasonable to leave fields blank if you can't populate them without violating the rules.  Besides, knowing where a movie is made has nothing to do with the CoO.

---------------
Posted:
Topic Replies: 19, Topic Views: 1385
If you open a profile for editing you begin on the General Information tab.  On this screen the Case Type (and the Slip Cover checkbox) can influence whether or not banners appear.

Also, if you click on the Cover Scans tab you will see that Media Banner may be set to On, Off, or Automatic.

---------------
Posted:
Topic Replies: 3, Topic Views: 634
When there is just one column I enter the cast from top to bottom, so I do the same thing when there are multiple columns (IOW, I enter the names by row, from top to bottom), unless there is some obvious reason not to, such as if the names are alphabetized by column.

---------------
Posted:
Topic Replies: 15, Topic Views: 1431
Quoting GSyren:
Quote:
I resent "can't be bothered".

Please don't take it that way.  I would say the same of myself, and is why I make very few contributions.

---------------
Posted:
Topic Replies: 36, Topic Views: 1659
Quoting mreeder50:
Quote:
But, if their individual credits are for both, wouldn't that mean they did both. If they were listed under a group heading of both and did not have individual credits, I would agree, not to list them because you wouldn't have any idea which they did.

Per the OP:
Quoting Gamemaster:
Quote:
This goes for only a list of people, not for individual credits. So what do you think we should do?

---------------
Posted:
Topic Replies: 7, Topic Views: 882
Quoting paulb_99:
Quote:
But if there are a lot of mistakes in the cast credits (Wrong names, wrong order etc.), why would we assume the roles are correct?

And  what if there are NO MISTAKES, and only changes to a Common Name are being made?

Notice that GSyren isn't saying the roles are incorrect, only that he can't be bothered to check them himself and so doesn't feel comfortable re-contributing them.  I say he should save himself even more trouble and keep his changes local.

---------------
Posted:
Topic Replies: 36, Topic Views: 1659
I wouldn't list them in the online database since it's an ambiguous credit.  Some listed might be hair only, some might be make-up only, and some may do both.

---------------
Posted:
Topic Replies: 7, Topic Views: 882
If Ken was worried about being sued he should probably not allow cast or crew data to be included in initial contributions, where no one is allowed to vote on it.  Also, he should probably stop allowing cast and crew to be copied from existing (often old and IMDB cloned) approved profiles.

---------------
Posted:
Topic Replies: 36, Topic Views: 1659
Quoting GSyren:
Quote:
If there were changes to the cast I can either contribute the corrected cast (w/o roles), or I can refrain from contributing the cast (leaving the uncorrected cast plus roles in the online).

Those are the only two options. I just want to know which one you think is better.

I vote for option two.  It makes your life easier and no one will ever complain about it.

---------------
Posted:
Topic Replies: 36, Topic Views: 1659
First, I would say watch the film.  If that's not feasible then I would check the Intervocative site for notes.  If those don't help, I would check the roles against a few sites (e.g. IMDB, AFI, The Movie DB, Wikipedia, etc.) and if there is agreement, leave those roles intact.

---------------
Posted:
Topic Replies: 36, Topic Views: 1659
Until an upgrade is available, if you have the desktop version you can add a tag for 3D and upload your collection to your phone, where you are currently able to filter on tags.

---------------
Posted:
Topic Replies: 2, Topic Views: 746
These are all collections of films, not individual films called "Dracula", "The Mummy" or "The Wolf Man", so I would say it makes much more sense that "Complete Legacy Collection" is part of the title of the collection, rather than an edition of the films "Dracula", "The Mummy" or "The Wolf Man".

---------------
Posted:
Topic Replies: 14, Topic Views: 1853
Quoting mreeder50:
Quote:
I don't agree with either option. Measure with a screen gauge.

If the measured AR is within a percent or two of any of DVDP's drop-down values, use the appropriate drop down value.  If we're going to be nitpicky we have to say that 16:9 is 1.7777777777777777777777777777...

---------------
Posted:
Topic Replies: 8, Topic Views: 1152
Quoting GSyren:
Quote:
I've seen screeners accept all kinds of crap, but now they're turning down good profiles that I've spent hours of work auditing. Well screw that! 

The way I look at it, I audit my profiles for my own benefit, and I will occasionally contribute that work if the mood strikes me (which is infrequently.)  If the recipients of my work want it they are welcome to it.  If they don't, I just move on.  The online database is not my database, so I don't worry about it very much.

---------------
Posted:
Topic Replies: 23, Topic Views: 2067
Yes.  You are not allowed to "mass copy from a third party commercial database which violates their stated usage license".  However, there is no prohibition from acquiring some information from a third party database.  For instance, on many older films (I'm talking about 1930's vintage) it's not uncommon for the main cast to have roles credited and for supporting cast to have no roles credited.  If you were to use roles from a third party database for this portion of the cast I don't believe it would be a violation of the rules.

---------------
Posted:
Topic Replies: 23, Topic Views: 2067
Quoting GSyren:
Quote:
If it's an uncut release and we put in rating details for a cut theatrical release, then those details could be grossly misleading.

Could be, but probably won't be.  If the theatrical cut is rated R for "whatever" it's not unlikely that there is at least as much of "whatever" in the unrated home video cut.

---------------
Posted:
Topic Replies: 12, Topic Views: 1294
I think I would open a support ticket.

---------------
Posted:
Topic Replies: 4, Topic Views: 657
I think if a film's theatrical release was rated but the home video release is unrated it's OK to include the rating details of the theatrical rating.  But if the film has never received a rating I would leave it blank.

---------------
Posted:
Topic Replies: 12, Topic Views: 1294
No, do not include "Library of Congress Ex-Slave Recordings" as a cast member.  This apparently refers to an audio archive and not to a person or group of people.

---------------
Posted:
Topic Replies: 6, Topic Views: 918
Quoting T!M:
Quote:
But as I said: there's bound to be someone who would use a different approach. I can only tell you how I would handle it.

My approach would be to throw it away and forget about it*.  Anything with seven feature films on one disc has got to be virtually unwatchable. 



* Yes, I have done this with a few of my DVD purchases.

---------------
Posted:
Topic Replies: 2, Topic Views: 435
It's Thursday.

---------------
Posted:
Topic Replies: 2, Topic Views: 712
Quoting CinemaDude:
Quote:
Thing is, some would say it doesn't make all that much of difference,

The fact is it really doesn't make much of a difference (3%), and people who want to put in 1.37:1 can do so. I sometimes do that myself, but all I really want to know is if the presentation is widescreen or not, and both 1.33:1 and 1.37:1 tell me the same thing: not widescreen.

---------------
Posted:
Topic Replies: 2, Topic Views: 766
Quoting T!M:
Quote:
But "financed in association by" doesn't immediately cut it, IMHO. Thoughts?

You mean that governmental agencies that give tax breaks for filming in their jurisdictions aren't included as production companies?

---------------
Posted:
Topic Replies: 27, Topic Views: 2959
Might one use the copyright notice to help clarify?

---------------
Posted:
Topic Replies: 27, Topic Views: 2959
Invelos Forums->Posts by scotthm Page: 1 2 3 4  Previous   Next