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
More Movies on one disc/Alternative Version
Author Message
DVD Profiler Unlimited RegistrantStar ContributorMagmadrag
Master of childprofiles
Registered: May 25, 2007
Germany Posts: 342
Posted:
PM this userView this user's DVD collectionDirect link to this postReply with quote
I need your help to find out what is right or wrong.

1. "Hollywood Collection" contains 6 movies, 3 on a disc
2. I created the parent (by EAN) for the case and two childs by Disc-ID (each for 3 movies)
3. I got an update where the Disc-ID was used for just one movie of each, all other data was deleted/erased and for the other movies someone else created alternative versions of the Disc-ID

I know about Alternative Versions, but is the contributer right to delete existing data? In my opinion the Disc-Profile for the whole disc (with all 3 movies credited) should be kept and for the first movie of each disc there should have been created a further "alternative version". As far as I know only a few people enjoy profiles on "sub-disc-level".

So could someone explain me which way is right or wrong in situations like these?
DVD Profiler Unlimited RegistrantStar ContributorAndyEN
Registered: May 25, 2007
Posts: 118
Posted:
PM this userView this user's DVD collectionDirect link to this postReply with quote
The standard is to have a barebones profile for the set itself, and then child profiles only for individual movies, not a child profile for the individual discs. if each of the discs is in its own case, you would use the the same images for every movie on that disc, but movie credits are only used for the specific movie.
 Last edited: by AndyEN
DVD Profiler Unlimited RegistrantStar Contributorhuskersports
Registered: September 29, 2008
Reputation: Highest Rating
United States Posts: 2,370
Posted:
PM this userView this user's DVD collectionDirect link to this postReply with quote
Since each disc has 3 separate and distinct movies, no info specific to each movie is allowed in the parent profile (your EAN in this case). What AndyEN said is correct. You would have to use the discID/Alternate discID #1/Alternate discID#2 for each of the 3 movies on each disc.
My one wish for the DVD Profiler online database: Ban or remove the disc-level profiles of TV season sets. It completely screws up/inflates the CLT.
FACT: Imdb is WRONG 70% of the time! Misspelled cast, incomplete cast, wrong cast/crew roles. So for those who want DVD Profiler to be "as perfect as Imdb", good luck with that.
Stop adding UNIT crew! They're invalid credits. Stop it!
DVD Profiler Unlimited RegistrantLowpro
Registered: March 14, 2007
Reputation: High Rating
United States Posts: 254
Posted:
PM this userVisit this user's homepageDirect link to this postReply with quote
There's no way to properly profile each movie unless each movie has its own profile.  As such, I would create a parent profile for the release as a whole and child profiles for each movie by Disc ID, Alternate Disc ID's being used for the 2nd and 3rd movies contained on a given disc.  And I would profile the release this way irrespective of what the Contribution Guidelines call for.

If profiles had yet to be contributed for the release I'd contribute them, then locking my local profiles down.  Whatever is done with the profiles I had contributed is irrelevant at that point.  People can do whatever they want to them.  I'm not going to allow my local profiles to be updated by anything in the Invelos online database anyway and will never need to download the profiles fresh so.

And locally I'd use movie specific front cover images for the child profiles.  It makes for a much nicer browsing experience that way.  My local database is my own.  Adhering to the Contribution Guidelines with respects to one's local database is silly.  To each his own naturally, but I have no interest in being part of the collective.
My DVD/Blu-ray Collection
 Last edited: by Lowpro
DVD Profiler Unlimited RegistrantStar ContributorDanae Cassandra
Mad Scientist at work!
Registered: May 26, 2007
Reputation: Great Rating
United States Posts: 2,845
Posted:
PM this userView this user's DVD collectionDirect link to this postReply with quote
From the contribution rules:

Quote:

Note: Do not create and contribute a disc ID profile with multiple movies:
UPC Entry: (Movie 1/Movie 2) data
Disc ID A: (Movie 1/Movie 2) data
Disc ID A Entry (Variant ID #1): Movie 1 data
Disc ID A Entry (Variant ID #2): Movie 2 data
If more of us valued food and cheer and song above hoarded gold, it would be a merrier world.
-- Thorin Oakenshield
DVD Profiler Unlimited RegistrantStar ContributorObiKen
Registered: October 22, 2015
Reputation: Great Rating
Australia Posts: 202
Posted:
PM this userDirect link to this postReply with quote
Quoting Magmadrag:
Quote:
I need your help to find out what is right or wrong.

1. "Hollywood Collection" contains 6 movies, 3 on a disc
2. I created the parent (by EAN) for the case and two childs by Disc-ID (each for 3 movies)
3. I got an update where the Disc-ID was used for just one movie of each, all other data was deleted/erased and for the other movies someone else created alternative versions of the Disc-ID


You have a UPC profile that contains more than one film (that is, two or more different films), so you need to construct a BOX SET profile, and you must follow the rules for box sets here.

Please note the paragraph highlighted in yellow, which states:
"Discs with more than one movie on a single side should be entered as one profile per movie. Use a disc ID profile, and as many disc ID alternate profiles as required."

This you did not do in point 2 above and that is why you witnessed alternate profiles for the other movies in point 3 above.

If you follow the box set rules, you should end up with these seven (7) profiles for your scenario:

UPC Parent  (no disc info, no cast, no crew, no disc features)
    |
    ==> Disc1-ID        child    (movie1)
    ==> Disc1-ID #1  child    (movie2)
    ==> Disc1-ID #2  child    (movie3)
    ==> Disc2-ID        child    (movie4)
    ==> Disc2-ID #1  child    (movie5)
    ==> Disc2-ID #2  child    (movie6)

Hope that helps.
DVD Profiler Unlimited RegistrantStar ContributorMagmadrag
Master of childprofiles
Registered: May 25, 2007
Germany Posts: 342
Posted:
PM this userView this user's DVD collectionDirect link to this postReply with quote
This brings me close to the decision to stop contributing for some reasons:

The guys wo release contributions should know the rules also, don't they? As the initial Disc-Profile was released without any problem with all three movies in it, how could this have happened? Declining the contribution allready then with the reason of thos sub-disc-level child profiles would not have caused that trouble.

And: Meanwhile I feel personally attacked by the releasers: Accepting an alt. version according to the rules seems to be okay, but accepting a non-alternative version which destroys my work (see one of my last threads according to alt. versions) enhances my disbelief in a so called "community" here

And: I am not sure if the Alt. Version was established in the rules in 2016 or before. So waht about all the profiles which were correct before and became wrong by establishing this new rule?

The rule was at least established before "SD on BluRay" was released. And imo it should be overthought especially in that case: Imagine you have 10 - 20 movies on one SD-Bluray and need to same Disc-ID for every single movie. If we didn't have much confusion before, this will finally make that possible.

So to say: My time for contributing might end for a while as here is no teamwork anymore. Here are the ones who know the rules and the releasers who either doin't know or don't practice them. And destroying work is not acceptable months and years later!

Goodbye!
DVD Profiler Unlimited RegistrantStar ContributorDanae Cassandra
Mad Scientist at work!
Registered: May 26, 2007
Reputation: Great Rating
United States Posts: 2,845
Posted:
PM this userView this user's DVD collectionDirect link to this postReply with quote
Quoting Magmadrag:
Quote:

And: I am not sure if the Alt. Version was established in the rules in 2016 or before. So waht about all the profiles which were correct before and became wrong by establishing this new rule?


You're correct - this is a newer rule, and the older style was to use the UPC for the parent, and then the disc IDs for each disc, dividing each movie on the disc with episode dividers.  After the introduction of the alternate ID profile option, this was changed so that each movie had its own profile via alternate ID.

In this case, the previously correct profiles should be altered to the currently correct profiles.  So, for example, King of the Cowboys: The Ultimate Roy Rogers Collection, which I originally created with 5 disc level child profiles in 2010, now has 25 child profiles as of 2018.

Quote:

And destroying work is not acceptable months and years later!


What it seems you're arguing here is that because someone did the work of making a profile, it should remain as is, untouched, simply because someone put work into it.  If that was the case, common names, birth years, any auditing of profiles should not be done.  The profile stands as a monument to its creator.

That's not feasible.  The database is a constantly evolving thing, the work of many people, used by many people.  The rules have changed, the abilities of the program have changed, in many cases for the better.

As for the screeners, they often take profiles that have mistakes.  They don't have the discs in front of them, and the kind of profile described would still be a correct style for a disc of short films (which don't get their own alternate-ID profiles).  So a UPC/disc-level/disc-level could be correct, and they wouldn't know, because they don't have the disc.  They rely on notes and votes, I believe.

I can't claim to know anything about the screeners, but given Ken's lack of involvement, I personally think it's one or two people volunteering a bit of time to keep Profiler going for us.  If they accept profiles that have to be changed/corrected later, I see it as a small price to pay for the continued operation of the online section of the program.
If more of us valued food and cheer and song above hoarded gold, it would be a merrier world.
-- Thorin Oakenshield
 Last edited: by Danae Cassandra
DVD Profiler Unlimited RegistrantStar ContributorAndyEN
Registered: May 25, 2007
Posts: 118
Posted:
PM this userView this user's DVD collectionDirect link to this postReply with quote
I don't think anyone's work is so much being destroyed as being amended and relocated when needed. If you took the time to type up credits for movies that got shifted, the work is still there, it's just been moved to a new profile.

I suspect that the screening process is less strict for an initial inclusion than for modifications because once there's a starting point, things can get fine tuned from there. But there are a lot of obscure DVDs out there that might never see the light of day here at all if they weren't allowed in initially with a few warts. The approval process for new submissions is usually much faster than for modifications, suggesting that modifications get looked at a lot more closely.
DVD Profiler Unlimited RegistrantStar Contributorrdodolak
Registered: March 18, 2007
Reputation: Superior Rating
United States Posts: 1,475
Posted:
PM this userView this user's DVD collectionDirect link to this postReply with quote
I was never a fan of the new rule to create all these separate alternate disc IDs for multiple movies on a disc since it splits the movies into separate profiles and creates more clutter.  I understand the need to have alternate profiles for UPCs/EANs since they have been reused in the past, but there should only ever be one unique disc ID (i.e. changing the disc content changes the disc ID).  I would have preferred a way to profile each movie but still be attached to a single disc ID profile.

It would have also been nice to be able to divorce the cover images from the alternate profiles this way someone doesn't have to create a whole separate alternate profile just for a different cover.  You end up with splintering the updates for the multiple different versions of the alternate profiles even if it's the same disc ID and it creates more clutter.
DVD Profiler Unlimited RegistrantStar Contributorscotthm
Registered: March 20, 2007
Reputation: Great Rating
United States Posts: 2,813
Posted:
PM this userView this user's DVD collectionDirect link to this postReply with quote
Quoting rdodolak:
Quote:
I was never a fan of the new rule to create all these separate alternate disc IDs for multiple movies on a disc since it splits the movies into separate profiles and creates more clutter.

That's one of the most useful and appreciated features added to the program since I started using it in 2007.

---------------
 Last edited: by scotthm
DVD Profiler Unlimited RegistrantStar ContributorDanae Cassandra
Mad Scientist at work!
Registered: May 26, 2007
Reputation: Great Rating
United States Posts: 2,845
Posted:
PM this userView this user's DVD collectionDirect link to this postReply with quote
Quoting scotthm:
Quote:
Quoting rdodolak:
Quote:
I was never a fan of the new rule to create all these separate alternate disc IDs for multiple movies on a disc since it splits the movies into separate profiles and creates more clutter.

That's one of the most useful and appreciated features added to the program since I started using it in 2007.

I agree.  I used to have all sorts of manual profiles for the individual films, so the alt ID profiles have been awesome.
If more of us valued food and cheer and song above hoarded gold, it would be a merrier world.
-- Thorin Oakenshield
DVD Profiler Unlimited RegistrantStar Contributorrdodolak
Registered: March 18, 2007
Reputation: Superior Rating
United States Posts: 1,475
Posted:
PM this userView this user's DVD collectionDirect link to this postReply with quote
Quoting scotthm:
Quote:
Quoting rdodolak:
Quote:
I was never a fan of the new rule to create all these separate alternate disc IDs for multiple movies on a disc since it splits the movies into separate profiles and creates more clutter.

That's one of the most useful and appreciated features added to the program since I started using it in 2007.

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


It's nice to profile the details of each film, but I would have preferred a different method.  I just believe it would be better to have a way to catalog all of those pertinent details but contained within one disc profile since the content of the disc can't change.
DVD Profiler Unlimited RegistrantStar Contributormarcelb7
Registered: Oct. 16, 2000
Registered: March 13, 2007
Reputation: Great Rating
Netherlands Posts: 731
Posted:
PM this userView this user's DVD collectionDirect link to this postReply with quote
Quoting Danae Cassandra:
Quote:
I agree.  I used to have all sorts of manual profiles for the individual films, so the alt ID profiles have been awesome.

For films, it's a great feature. For TV series... Let's just say I'm not a fan.
 Last edited: by marcelb7
DVD Profiler Unlimited RegistrantStar ContributorAndyEN
Registered: May 25, 2007
Posts: 118
Posted:
PM this userView this user's DVD collectionDirect link to this postReply with quote
Quoting marcelb7:
Quote:
Quoting Danae Cassandra:
Quote:
I agree.  I used to have all sorts of manual profiles for the individual films, so the alt ID profiles have been awesome.

For films, it's a great feature. For TV series... Let's just say I'm not a fan.


A bit of a tangent, but I wish TV shows were presented closer to movies, though with all the episodes in a disc together a la short films. But not duplicated in the main set. I know some prefer the reverse, but discs can be lost/stolen/not returned with the rest of the set (this has happened to me at least once)/sold separately (the latter especially from video rental places), so this way would reduce duplication and more accurately reflect what a user actually has.
DVD Profiler Unlimited RegistrantStar Contributorscotthm
Registered: March 20, 2007
Reputation: Great Rating
United States Posts: 2,813
Posted:
PM this userView this user's DVD collectionDirect link to this postReply with quote
Quoting rdodolak:
Quote:
It's nice to profile the details of each film, but I would have preferred a different method.

TBH, I just consider a disc with multiple films the same as a box with multiple films.  We've had container profiles (boxes) for as long as I've used Profiler, so this seemed like a natural extension of that.

For those who would rather profile discs than content, there are always profile locks.

---------------
 Last edited: by scotthm
    Invelos Forums->DVD Profiler: Contribution Discussion Page: 1 2  Previous   Next