| Message |
Details |
All in a Night's Work (1961) ==> Howard Smith
The Matchmaker (1958) ==> Howard Smith
Who's Got the Action? (1962) ==> Howard Smith | Posted: Topic Replies: 7, Topic Views: 10434 |
 |
Quoting GSyren:
Quote:
Have you compared the results to see which function that seems best in finding blurry scans? Even though the results are different, I find it hard to say that one is more efficient than the other. How about you?
There was a reasonable correlation between the two methods. Those with poor contrast and /or fewer colours were typically rated with lower variance. Back covers tended to have higher variance values than their corresponding front cover, as they had, in the main, more information (text, colours, images, contrast).
Either method is fine. The output result can be sorted from lowest to highest variance (that is, worst to best), so allows for quick identification and confirmation that the image in question is in need of fixing.
In some cases, a low variance image cannot be improved because it is mainly a dark image (or solid colour) with small variations in pixel intensities. | Posted: Topic Replies: 20, Topic Views: 8452 |
|
SharpnessCheck ver. 1.1.0 (64-bit)
Scan 3920 profiles on Intel (Coffee Lake) i5-8600K CPU @ 3.60GHz (6 cores, no hyperthreading):
Laplacian:
(Front)
parallel tasks
6 ==> 21.86 secs
3 ==> 30.89 secs
2 ==> 43.94 secs
1 ==> 84.25 secs
(Back)
6 ==> 22.23 secs
3 ==> 30.97 secs
2 ==> 44.28 secs
1 ==> 84.46 secs
Wavelet:
(Front)
parallel tasks
6 ==> 13.18 secs
3 ==> 14.78 secs
2 ==> 17.58 secs
1 ==> 29.13 secs
(Back)
6 ==> 13.31 secs
3 ==> 14.93 secs
2 ==> 18.01 secs
1 ==> 30.09 secs
Windows resource monitor shows all processors are active, no matter how many parallel tasks are configured.
All cores at 100% when parallel tasks at 6 or more, and all cores at a lower % of activity depending on the reduced number of parallel tasks configured.
Hope that helps. | Posted: Topic Replies: 20, Topic Views: 8452 |
|
Quoting GSyren:
Quote:
Has the problem with adding new birth years also been fixed? I haven't been able to check. Perhaps someone that's more into birthyears can check that?
I'm not sure if this is the same problem you were describing, but I remember trying to add a new profile in June this year and the web site came back with an error message about a birth year not being allowed.
I just created an update to this profile and added the birth year and surprisingly, the web site now asks me to click a check box with this new entry and to provide additional notes verifying this change.
Is this the scenario you describe? | Posted: Topic Replies: 12, Topic Views: 7859 |
|
| This tool (v2.0) is a Hollywood production, it works like a dream! | Posted: Topic Replies: 32, Topic Views: 14096 |
|
Quoting Addicted2DVD:
Quote:
wow... thanks Tim... I honestly don't know how I want to vote on this one. I been going back and forth on this in my head since you posted it! 
There is already a precedent in the online database for a comic book artist being credited for OMB and OCB, and that is Jack Kirby (CAPTAIN AMERICA, ANT-MAN, AVENGERS, BLACK PANTHER, FANTASTIC FOUR, HULK, IRON MAN, THOR, X-MEN, ...).
Jack Kirby was an American comic book artist, he was not a writer. He combined with writers Stan Lee and Joe Simon to create many of the super heroes. | Posted: Topic Replies: 4, Topic Views: 4172 |
|
Interesting credit. When it comes to screenplay adaptations, a graphic novel is no different to a comic book, the screenwriter may use the text and/or drawings to better understand/develop the story and its characters.
As such, I consider the above screen credit as a source material credit (OMB). | Posted: Topic Replies: 4, Topic Views: 4172 |
|
Quoting GSyren:
Quote:
I have a bit of a conundrum. The alternate source that I am looking at contains 128 different categories. That may be historically correct, but not very helpful. I'm wondering if one could merge some of them. For example, 22 music categories? Wouldn't "Score" and "Song" be enough? Any thoughts on which categories that could be conflated (if at all)?
May I suggest you adopt the categories listed in The Official Academy Awards Database:
https://awardsdatabase.oscars.org/?search=Basic
You can then condense the various music categories under:
• MUSIC (Scoring) <== original or adaptation (there may be multiple winners in the same year)
• MUSIC (Song) <== original or adaptation
Other categories that may be condensed:
• WRITING <== [includes original story, screenplay, original screenplay, adapted screenplay, etc.)
• PRODUCTION DESIGN <== [includes art direction, art direction (B/W), art direction (color), etc.]
• CINEMATOGRAPHY <== [includes cinematography (black-and-white), cinematography (color)]
• SOUND <== [includes Sound, Sound Recording, Sound Editing, Sound Mixing, last two discontinued after 2019] | Posted: Topic Replies: 32, Topic Views: 14096 |
|
Quoting GSyren:
Quote:
Fun facts:
- The person with the most nominations has been nominated 49 times. Guess who? JOHN WILLIAMS
- One person has been nominated 17 times without winning. Who's the unlucky guy? GREG P. RUSSELL
My answer is in BOLD.
I believe the statistics for John Williams is incomplete, the nominations (up to 2023) should be 53. I double-checked other composers/song writers (such as Dimitri Tiomkin) and found "best original song" nominations were not included in the statistics - is this right? | Posted: Topic Replies: 32, Topic Views: 14096 |
|
| Are you referring to the 1976 computer game "Colossal Cave Adventure" which used the magic code "XYZZY" to teleport the player between two locations? | Posted: Topic Replies: 32, Topic Views: 14096 |
|
What a nice reference tool, reminds me of the days when I used Microsoft's Cinemania.
With regards to Thelma Ritter, it was a shame she was 6 nom./0 wins. Even worse was Glenn Close with 8/0 wins, and what about Stanley Kubrick (9/0 wins). None of these compare with sound man Greg P. Russell with 17/0 wins.
I was disappointed when I couldn't find any technical nominations for GSyren, as I believe this person deserved it! Many thanks. | Posted: Topic Replies: 32, Topic Views: 14096 |
|
Quoting rdodolak:
Quote:
In this case, I'd have to agree with the other poster based on my initial research. Here's the link to the company's registration in the UK.
https://find-and-update.company-information.service.gov.uk/company/SC406063
In Britain, Ltd. or Limited after the company name implies it's a private limited company which means it's a limited company (have limited liability). This aligns with what is shown in the link above, where the company is a private limited company and they have the Limited after the name.
For UK companies, I treat "Limited" or "Ltd" as a company suffix.
However, in the USA, "Limited" or "Ltd." is a corporation, whilst LLC is a limited liability company.
I have seen "Ltd." as part of the American company name in film credits, such as Lucasfilm Ltd, which is the trade name owned by Lucasfilm Ltd. LLC (https://uspto.report/TM/78662806).
In this example, I would treat the American company name as "Lucasfilm Ltd." and "LLC" as the company suffix:
https://opencorporates.com/companies/us_ca/201235310073 | Posted: Topic Replies: 6, Topic Views: 6736 |
|