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 ObiKen Page: 1 2 3  Previous   Next
Message Details
Gun Crazy: Norma (Miss Cummins' Wardrobe by)
Posted:
Topic Replies: 4, Topic Views: 63
4 for Texas: Norma Koch (Costumes Designed by)
Posted:
Topic Replies: 4, Topic Views: 63
Congratulations on a job well done. Your new plugin works! 

Just for completeness, did you also think about the "Scan DVD-ROM drive" on Windows 10 not finding the new Disc-ID profile in the local DISCS.DAT file?
Posted:
Topic Replies: 11, Topic Views: 385
Quoting T!M:
Quote:
Quoting Wigram:
Quote:

Even if everything else is the same, a different DiscID is a significantly different content.

While I'd be happy to submit an "alternate version" for this, this is exactly one of the points which gives me pause. You say that the Disc ID is significantly different, but the contribution rules don't name a different Disc ID as a reason for an "alternate version". Instead, the contribution rules at http://www.invelos.com/dvdpro/contributions/Rules.aspx?display=dvdspecification explicitly explain how additional Disc ID's should be submitted into the existing profile. So if the Disc ID was the only difference, I wouldn't have immediately thought of creating an "alternate version". To me, the difference in cover art would be the bigger cue to think of creating an "alternate version", although there, one could argue about how significant the deviation is (being no more than either the presence or lack of the official "Blu-ray Disc" logo.

Agree with T!M's comments regarding re-contributing the Disc ID.

Since when does a pressed Blu-ray disc or a manufactured-on-demand burnt Blu-ray disc matter as far as the rules go.

You still need a Blu-ray player to play both discs and when DVD Profiler calculates the Disc-ID, it executes the same Invelos 4K/Blu-ray 64-bit CRC algorithm for both discs. The program doesn't discriminate, so why should we.

In any event, updated Disc-IDs in a UPC profile (since beginning of 2017) has limited functionality. It will still help you locate profiles in your local database file (DISCS.DAT) when you scan by DVD ROM drive, but don't expect to find it in the online profile list when using the Add by Disc option, you won't.
Posted:
Topic Replies: 10, Topic Views: 505
Karsten, here is another web site that provides source code and a small Windows command line program (dvdid-0.1.1-win32.zip) to calculate the DVD id: http://dvdid.cjkey.org.uk/

The above site was also cloned on Github: https://github.com/rdp/dvdid

I've tested the Windows command line program dvdid.exe on XP, Win7 and various Win10 versions and it appears to be accurate. AnyDVD software will interfere with the command line program, so AnyDVD needs to be disabled for it to work properly.


NOTE:
Interestingly, when AnyDVD was enabled on my Win 7 platform, the dvdid.exe program reported a BAD DVD Disc ID.
When AnyDVD was disabled, the dvdid.exe program reported the GOOD DVD Disc ID.

In order to figure it out, I created an ISO image (region free) of the original region coded DVD using AnyDVD software.

After disabling AnyDVD, I did the following:
+ burnt a new DVD using the cracked ISO image created by AnyDVD
+ visually compared the files on burnt DVD with original DVD  (no differences - file sizes, names, date/time stamps, volume name and voulme size were identical).
+ ran dvdid.exe on burnt DVD and got the same BAD DVD Disc ID that was reported on original DVD when AnyDVD was ENABLED!
+ used a tool to compare the contents of each file on the DVDs and found only one file different, the VIDEO_TS.IFO file. 
Several bytes inside this file had changed values without alteration to the file size.  My only conclusion was that these bytes stored the region coding information of the DVD.

As you are aware, the byte contents of this file is an input variable in the DVD's 64bit CRC calculations.

So, when AnyDVD misreported the DVD DiscID in the past, I suspect it was the DiscID for the cracked (region free) DVD.
Posted:
Topic Replies: 188, Topic Views: 12407
Quoting MikaLove:
Quote:

Are the contribution rules not clear enough?
Ken left it like they are;
Quote:
If someone is not credited with one of these roles (or direct translations of these roles), do not include them in the Crew section.


I voted YES to make-up artist because the Hollywood Makeup Artists Guild definition for Makeup showed, in my opinion, the direct translation of "Body Makeup" credit is "Makeup":

"make-up shall be defined as any change in the appearance of a performer’s face or body created by the application of cosmetics, facial hair goods, and/or prosthetic appliances applied directly to the performer’s face or body..."

The application of cosmetics to either head/body is makeup by the Guild's definition. The makeup/body-makeup artists work in the Makeup Department on a movie set and they adhere to applying cosmetics to the designated areas of the human body, as per union rules. Any credits received will be for cosmetic makeup only.

Within the Makeup Department will be a team of special makeup effects artists who will be assigned the special effects work (or outsourced). They will be makeup artists who have additional skills in special effects makeup. Any credits received will be for Makeup Effects.
Posted:
Topic Replies: 37, Topic Views: 1186
Quoting MikaLove:
Quote:

Also, if you say "movie makeup is a single profession", then why do we differ between them here?



There is only one Make-up Department on a movie set.  You also have a Hair Department and a Wardrobe Department, they are different professions.

You are confusing a work demarcation classification of make-up artists, enforced by the union, as different professions.  The issue we are discussing is, what happens when their movie credit matches their film crew classification ("Body Make-up").
Posted:
Topic Replies: 37, Topic Views: 1186
Quoting MikaLove:
Quote:

@ObiKen:

I am a bit surprised that you are taking this direction after your first post, as you are completely contradicting both it, and the very information you linked to.

I have been consistent, you have inferred incorrectly what I implied. What we are discussing is the movie credit "body make-up" and movie makeup artists. My first post highlighted the different work classifications used for movie makeup artists in the link provided previously as follows (note the bolded heading of the section):

"Responsibilities of a Movie Makeup Artist
The responsibilities of a movie make-up artist vary depending on the type of work and level of responsibility that the make-up artist has. Hollywood union regulations, for example, classify movie make-up artists based on the area of the actor's body being made up:

• A make-up artist is allowed to apply cosmetics only from the top of the head to the top of the breastbone, from fingertips to wrists and from toes to ankles.
• A body make-up artist applies cosmetics as required to any other areas of the actor's body. While the regular make-up artist generally works throughout filming, the body make-up artist is hired per day when needed."

Note the wording "apply cosmetics", not prosthetics (which is special effects makeup).

Movie makeup is a single profession with various areas of application/skills (head, body, special effects), and this was confirmed in the Makeup Artists Guild (Local 706) definition that I quoted in my second post.

Additionally, when a movie makeup artist uses both makeup AND prosthetics to alter a performers appearance or character, it is considered by the union as special make-up effects. Please note that prosthetics can be applied to HEAD and or body, NOT just the body.

So if one interprets "Body Make-up" as being Makeup Effects, what happens when prosthetics are applied to the head? A body make-up artist can't work on the head in movies, that's against union rules, so does that make Make-up Artists as Make-up Effects as well?

The answer is some Make-up Artists and some Body Make-up artists will have additional skills in special Make-Up effects and if used, be credited/paid for performing those special make-up effects.
Posted:
Topic Replies: 37, Topic Views: 1186
Quoting scotthm:
Quote:
Quoting MikaLove:
Quote:
To try and make it absolutely clear, look again at the rules here: they differ between head (make-up) and rest of body (effects).

I don't see a distinction between head and body in the Invelos crew table.

---------------

There isn't any, unless you interpret "Department Head" as Make-up for the Head.
Posted:
Topic Replies: 37, Topic Views: 1186
What ever the outcome, the following Alistair MacLean [Alistair Mac Lean] films are in the same boat:

THE GUNS OF NAVARONE 1961
THE SECRET WAYS 1961
ICE STATION ZEBRA 1968
WHERE EAGLES DARE 1969
WHEN EIGHT BELLS TOLL 1971
FEAR IS THE KEY 1973
BREAKHEART PASS 1976
FORCE 10 FROM NAVARONE 1978
RIVER OF DEATH 1989

If you go by the rules, then it is not an Original Material By credit.  Yes, it is the author's name above the title, but I'm not sure if the title can serve as a source for crew credits.

I have listed some similar discussions from the past that may help:
==> http://www.invelos.com/Forums.aspx?task=viewtopic&topicID=534355&PageNum=1
==> http://www.invelos.com/Forums.aspx?task=viewtopic&topicID=691099
Posted:
Topic Replies: 4, Topic Views: 260
Quoting scotthm:
Quote:
Quoting MikaLove:
Quote:
I disagree with the above.

I disagree with you.  A body makeup artist may be doing something as simple as covering a tattoo, and I don't consider that a makeup effect.

---------------

Absolutely correct, using cosmetics to hide freckles, tattoos, scars, blemishes, etc. on the head and/or body is makeup, not makeup-effects.

The definitive definition for Makeup comes from the the Makeup Artists & Hair Sylists Guild (http://www.local706.org/rules-regulations/):

"make-up shall be defined as any change in the appearance of a performer’s face or body created by the application of cosmetics, facial hair goods, and/or prosthetic appliances applied directly to the performer’s face or body. Prosthetics are any three-dimensional appliances, including transfers, that have been prepared in advance from a mold and applied to the actors to change his/her appearance and to give character to the make-up.  It could be as small as a scar or wound, or as large as full facial pieces, and/or body parts, or bald caps.  Make-up is NOT changes caused by special lighting, camera lenses, optical effects or computer imaging.  It is not puppets or any device that is not on the performer’s face or body."

Also note in the reference the annual Guild awards for Best Make-up are in three categories:

Best Contemporary Make-up – Outstanding Make-up designed to represent years after 2000 to present day with continuity of application throughout the entry.

Best Period and/or Character Make-up – Outstanding Period Make-up designed to represent years 2000 and prior, or Character Make-up of any period that changes the identity or appearance of an actor with NO use of prosthetics and continuity of application throughout the entry. 

Best Special Make-up Effects – Outstanding Make-up including the application of prosthetics to the performers face and or body, with continuity of application throughout the entry.  No mechanical, computer generated effects, or puppeteering will be considered.

Clearly, the Guild distinguishes Makeup Effects (involving the application of prosthetics to face or body) from Character Makeup (NO use of prosthetics).

So if the film credits displays "Body Makeup" then it is "Makeup" as defined by the Makeup Artists & Hair Sylists Guild. There was no reference to Prosthetics or Effects in "Body Makeup", so it cannot be interpreted as "Make-up Effects".

Whilst there is no literal match for "Body Make-up" in the Invelos credits rule, the operative work is "Makeup" and it was confirmed using a reputable reference (Makeup Artists & Hair Sylists Guild - Local 706).

That is why I voted YES to "Make-up Artist".
Posted:
Topic Replies: 37, Topic Views: 1186
The work and responsibilities of a movie makeup artist are constrained by film production contracts and union rules.

A movie makeup artist applies cosmetics from the top of the head to the top of the breastbone, from fingertips to wrists and from toes to ankles. A movie body makeup artist applies cosmetics to any area of the body that a regular movie makeup artist cannot:
https://entertainment.howstuffworks.com/movie-make-up-artist1.htm

On the other hand, Makeup Effects is makeup including the application of prosthetics to the performers face and/or body.
Posted:
Topic Replies: 37, Topic Views: 1186
Karsten, that is fine work, indeed!
Posted:
Topic Replies: 188, Topic Views: 12407
As far as I can see,there are two problems, namely, the online profile list and alternate DVDids.

Too often, the problems of the online profile list not showing UPC profiles when adding a disc is incorrectly blamed on the alternate DVDid issue.

ON-LINE PROFILE LIST and UPC PROFILES:
On my Windows 10 and Windows 7 systems, I found NO UPC profile was listed when adding by disc, where the Disc Info was submitted and approved after beginning of 2017 (this is true for DVD, Blu-ray and 4K discs).

To eliminate windows 10 from the equation, I conducted various tests over the last six months on a windows 7 platform, with the following Add by Disc results for UPCs explained:
==>  when you insert a disc, the Add by Disc screen will show the UPC if the Discid in the UPC profile was submitted and approved PRIOR to 2017.

==>  when you add an additional Discid in the Disc info section of an existing UPC profile, the online profile list will accommodate the additional Discid. After approval, when you use the Add by Disc screen, the UPC will only show if there exists a Discid in the UPC profile that was submitted and approved PRIOR to 2017.

This problem appears to have started well before the Win10 ver1809 upgrade (13-Nov-2018) and the release of DVDP version 4.0 (16-Sep-2017).

I do note under "Bug Fixes in version 3.9" the following fix:
Fixed: Identifies literally every title as hell on wheels, when adding by disc id

Did the problem exist then or did the fix introduce another problem that was missed in the beta testing phase?


ALTERNATE DISC-ID ISSUES:
The biggest impact is on Win 10 users without AnyDVD software, they will ONLY find new DVD Discid profiles created using the alternate DVD Discid (HD-DVD, Blu-rays and 4K are unaffected), whereas the AnyDVD user will be able to find any Discid profile as well as any UPC profile whose discid was approved prior to 2017, by enabling/disabling AnyDVD.

The display of UPC profiles, created after beginning of 2017, by the "Add by Disc" process is a non-event. It won't display UPCs no matter whether the disc type is Blu-ray, 4K or DVD (good or bad id).

Overwriting Discids in a UPC profile is OK, the online database stores multiple Discids, but when you download it, its always the last entered Discid that is downloaded. So lock it if you want to maintain the previous Discid in the UPC profile.  If the previous Discid was approved prior to 2017 then it will continue to show in the Add by Disc screen.


Will Microsoft fix the DirectShow API involved in the DVDid calculation?
No, it is now listed as deprecated software, slowly being replaced by Media Foundation software. Also note that Microsoft forcibly removed their own Media Center and DVD player software, that used the DVDid for bookmarking, in the Win 10 ver1809 upgrade. So their intentions are clear.

Can Invelos fix the DVDid problem?
Yes, they could if they tried. Currently, DVDP calculates the HD-DVD, Blu-ray and 4K Discids internally, whilst the DVD Discid uses Microsoft's DIRECTSHOW APIs. To fix it, Invelos will need to modify the program code to calculate the DVD Discid and ensure it is backward compatible.
The quickest and simplest way for Invelos to incorporate the change is use existing public domain software that comes with its own C source code, and it does exist!


At the end of the day, I have found no evidence to prove the alternate DVD Discid is not unique, so its business as usual.  Yes, I understand some search results are not complete, in particular, old DVD Discid profiles, but that is not a game-stopper.

When I compile a DVD box set, I use the Win 10 (no AnyDVD running) Discids, because the child Discids are accessible to all Win 10 users in the community, including those using AnyDVD software.
Posted:
Topic Replies: 188, Topic Views: 12407
Thirty Seconds Over Tokyo:  Invalid (no credit)

Station West:        Guinn "Big Boy" Williams

Hangman's Knot:  Guinn "Big Boy" Williams

The Desperadoes: Guinn (Big Boy) Williams
Posted:
Topic Replies: 18, Topic Views: 1615
Quoting MikaLove:
Quote:
However formulating the rules to say "should be the DVD itself" can cause confusion. Since some may argue that the case the disc comes in is also "the DVD". Better to phrase it "should be the movie/feature itself".


I should have quoted in my previous message the whole paragraph from the rules:
The authoritative source for information submitted should be the DVD itself.  Please don't submit content from a third party database, and always verify the specifications printed on the cover. In both cases, errors abound, so always verify the information directly from the DVD whenever possible.

The above paragraph quite clearly distinguishes "the DVD" from the covers/case the DVD comes in, so there should be no confusion. Basing your submission using the film's screen credits from "the DVD", instead of the back cover's film credit specification, is a valid and accurate implementation of the rule.
Posted:
Topic Replies: 13, Topic Views: 1537
MikaLove: Totally agree with you, the film's text credits have more credence than the credit blocks on the back cover that was composed by some package designer years, if not decades, after the film was released.

No one has provided verifiable evidence to substantiate that "Universal Pictures" was the Studio involved in 2004.

As per the rules: The authoritative source for information submitted should be the DVD itself.
Posted:
Topic Replies: 13, Topic Views: 1537
I understand T!M's reasoning, however, I have always followed the path outlined by primetime21 because I regard the "Isolated Track" as not an add-on feature, rather, it is already an integral part of the film itself.  The Audio tracks section covers this with the "Music Only" option.

Audio tracks and subtitles are an integral component of the film and are not considered to be add-on special features.

However,  "Commentary" has an Audio option in the profile as well as a check box in the Features section.  I believe this is because it is an add-on component, not integral to the film, just like all the other check boxes in the Features section.  Removal of any special features has no impact on the film.

"Other Features" is any add-on special feature not covered by the existing check boxes in the Features section.

Hope that provides some clarity on the topic.
Posted:
Topic Replies: 19, Topic Views: 2181
The rules state "The covers must match the profile exactly".

By "accurate facsimile", I mean an exact copy as true to the original source, namely, the covers minus the shrink wrap covering.
Posted:
Topic Replies: 6, Topic Views: 942
Agree that "production services" credit should be ignored.

As this film was made in 2004, the correct studio/production company was Universal Studios, for the following reasons:

1. Film's copyright in end credits at 02:11:19 displayed:
_________________________________________
    COPYRIGHT © 2004 UNIVERSAL STUDIOS
                ALL RIGHTS RESERVED
_________________________________________

2. Film's PG-13 rating listed distributor as Universal Studios:
    https://www.filmratings.com/Search?filmTitle=van+helsing&x=0&y=0
Posted:
Topic Replies: 13, Topic Views: 1537
All Imprint releases to date in local retail stores have come with a ratings label stuck on the plastic shrink wrap.

I always add an explanation for the ratings and cover scans (typically, a slip cover) in any Imprint profile I submit, for example:

The "MA 15+" rating logo and description was applied to the slip cover's plastic shrink wrap like a sticker. Whilst it could be peeled off and applied to the front slip cover, the contribution rules state the scan should be an accurate facsimile of the original cover, so it was not included in the submitted scan.

The following retailer's web site shows the matching rating details as it appeared on the shrink wrap:
    https://www.booktopia.com.au/hard-eight-imprint-collection-14-/dvd/9337369023045.html

Hope that helps.
Posted:
Topic Replies: 6, Topic Views: 942
Based on your furnished photo, I recognised Felicia Taylor (1964) in Law & Order: Criminal Intent, Season 1 Episode 22 ("Tuxedo Hill") @ 00:18:56 (PAL format). She was credited as "News Reporter" @ 00:41:54.

So doesn't that mean we still need the 1964 birth year entry to separate her from the unknown Felicia Taylor in "Coming to America"?
Posted:
Topic Replies: 5301, Topic Views: 279940
Law & Order: Criminal Intent: The First Year ==> CULLEN OLIVER JOHNSON as Milton Barish (Episode 9: "The Good Doctor") @ 00:41:48 (PAL format).
Posted:
Topic Replies: 7, Topic Views: 1141
Law & Order: The Second Year ==> CULLEN O. JOHNSON as Koomar (Episode 9: "Renunciation") @ 00:44:59 (PAL format).
Posted:
Topic Replies: 7, Topic Views: 1141
First Blood - Edward L. Sandlin (Sound Editor) @ 01:32:04
Posted:
Topic Replies: 16, Topic Views: 1893
Invelos Forums->Posts by ObiKen Page: 1 2 3  Previous   Next