 |
|
|
|
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 3 4 5 ...8  Previous Next
|
|
When do we disk ID side 2? |
|
|
|
|
|
| Author |
Message |
| Registered: March 13, 2007 |  Posts: 21,610 |
| | Posted: | | | | I get so tired of this garbage. Skip  | | | ASSUME NOTHING!!!!!!
CBE, MBE, MoA and proud of it.
Outta here
Billy Video |
| | Registered: March 13, 2007 | Reputation:  | | Posts: 1,911 |
| | Posted: | | | | What garbage? People that voice their oipinions? If you don't like other people's opinions, maybe you should leave? | | | | Signature banned: Reason out of date... |
|  | Dan W | | Registered: May 9, 2002 |
| Registered: March 13, 2007 | | Posts: 980 |
| | Posted: | | | | Quoting skipnet50: Quote:
I get so tired of this garbage.
Skip Skip, I'm hoping you just had a long day yesterday and you were answering in this thread when you should have been in bed asleep. Hopefully you awakened well rested and have clearer perspective and memory this morning. The Idea is (and always has been) to get to a point where we can run a search and have the information for each individual movie. You are taking several steps backwards by doing what you are proposing. While your proposal might work for TV episodes, it does not work for movies. I warned you that using dividers would cause this problem and you said it would help and not cause any problems. Here we are a few months later and you are not only condoning but even lobbying to go backwards instead of forward. Until we can have the full information on each of our movies, this db will always be second rate and will always be in the darkest shadow of IMDB and the like. | | | | Dan | | | | Last edited: by Dan W |
| | Registered: March 13, 2007 | | Posts: 2,694 |
| | Posted: | | | | Quoting pplchamp: Quote:
This is just my opinion but...
Be it a TV Series
Be it a Movie set
Be it an HD-DVD Hybrid
They all should be profiled to the side level. I don't care about future enhancements to the program that may still be coming. It is possible to profile both sides of all three, we should do it.
The only thing that should not be profiled by disc side is a double sided disc of the same movie (W/S and either FF or P&S) or a double sided disc where one side is only bonus material.
Don't even try to argue the inflated disc count. It's already infaslted by parent profiles of both movie sets and TV seriies parent profiles. It's already inflated by profiling bonus movies on bonus discs in two disc sets. The dsic count is broken along with corss-linking. Disc count needs to be changed to what it really is.. Profile Count. Bravo! I concur completely. | | | John
"Extremism in the defense of Liberty is no vice!" Senator Barry Goldwater, 1964
Make America Great Again! |
| | Dan W | | Registered: May 9, 2002 |
| Registered: March 13, 2007 | | Posts: 980 |
| | Posted: | | | | Quoting mdnitoil: Quote:
Just when I think I have the rules figured out, I make another blunder. 
I recently submitted child IDs for a two disk set. To remove all ambiguity, it was for "The Best of Abbott and Costello Volume 1". Now, the configuration of this set is 8 movies spread over 2 disks. It's one of those Universal dual layer, double sided fiascos. The upshot is, two movies per side.
My understanding was that we generate seperate disk IDs for individual sides as long as they contain discreetly different movies. A couple of folks are suggesting that I should use only two child profiles instead of the four I created.
I went through my collection to see how this has been handled in the past and found:
Mae West Glamour Collection, 2 disks, 4 children
Marlene Dietrich Glamour Collection, 2 disks, 4 children
Gary Cooper Franchise Collection, 2 disks, 4 children
Carol Lombard Glamour Collection, 2 disks, 4 children
John Wayne Franchise Collection, 2 disks, 3 children (Only 3 sides utilized)
None of these profiles were my doing, simply what I had to download in order to get the complete information for these sets.
So, my question is, how many child profiles should I be creating? Based on similar sets already stored in the database, I assumed 4 children. It's no problem for me to go back and readjust to two profiles, the hard work is over. I just want to get it right. I guess a followup question would be, if I did it wrong, does that mean we have to go back and fix all these other sets I've listed? You have it correct. The only one who is opposing you in this thread is Skip. I am at a complete loss as to his reason. | | | | Dan |
| | Registered: March 13, 2007 | | Posts: 275 |
| | Posted: | | | | I agree with the rest, got to profile both sides of the disc for movies and if more than one movie on each side then we should use deviders
Larry |
| | Registered: March 13, 2007 | | Posts: 21,610 |
| | Posted: | | | | So dan you violate our number one premise. We have users that periodically request the ability to obtain a Count of the number of Discs they own. It's easy enough to adjust for Boxset data. However, inserting phantom discs into the system makes it near impossible to filter for them, making those users wishes impossible to achieve. You and i have both always said, it may be something we could care less about, but if someone else wants it who are we to say they can't have it. Remember Sound?...I could care less about Sound data in Crew but you and Stef Colosi wanted it. I don't think that Ken coud write any code that would be able to isolate Side B fro Side A and recognize that it is ONE disc instead of Two. Are ther problems caused this, sure, there were massive issues caused by 2.4/2.5 not having an effective method of dealing with Multi-Feature/Episode discs at all, which was we ther Rules were deliberately vague in that area. Now we have dividers, we can now deal with the first part of this problem effectively, if you recall Ken said that was his first priority, now it's on to the reaminder of the data needed to FIX this once and for all and that is in the works.
Adding Phantom Discs accomplishes NOTHING.
Skip | | | ASSUME NOTHING!!!!!!
CBE, MBE, MoA and proud of it.
Outta here
Billy Video |
| | Dan W | | Registered: May 9, 2002 |
| Registered: March 13, 2007 | | Posts: 980 |
| | Posted: | | | | Quoting skipnet50: Quote:
So dan you violate our number one premise. We have users that periodically request the ability to obtain a Count of the number of Discs they own. It's easy enough to adjust for Boxset data. However, inserting phantom discs into the system makes it near impossible to filter for them, making those users wishes impossible to achieve. You and i have both always said, it may be something we could care less about, but if someone else wants it who are we to say they can't have it. Remember Sound?...I could care less about Sound data in Crew but you and Stef Colosi wanted it. I don't think that Ken coud write any code that would be able to isolate Side B fro Side A and recognize that it is ONE disc instead of Two. Are ther problems caused this, sure, there were massive issues caused by 2.4/2.5 not having an effective method of dealing with Multi-Feature/Episode discs at all, which was we ther Rules were deliberately vague in that area. Now we have dividers, we can now deal with the first part of this problem effectively, if you recall Ken said that was his first priority, now it's on to the reaminder of the data needed to FIX this once and for all and that is in the works.
Adding Phantom Discs accomplishes NOTHING.
Skip Our "number one premise" apparently, is not what you think it is. | | | | Dan |
| | Registered: March 13, 2007 | | Reputation: | | Posts: 1,911 |
| | Posted: | | | | What makes two sides of a disc a phantom disc? It's two readible dioscs glued together. Each with a unique disc ID.
If this issue is all about disc counf DON'T DOWNLOAD SIDE B DISCS. The same issue if you dont want ANY CHILDREN.
Why can't those of us that want it (Everyone but you in this topic) have it? | | | | Signature banned: Reason out of date... |
| | Dan W | | Registered: May 9, 2002 |
| Registered: March 13, 2007 | | Posts: 980 |
| | Posted: | | | | Quoting skipnet50: Quote:
..........now it's on to the reaminder of the data needed to FIX this once and for all and that is in the works.
Skip As I have said countless times (and you agreed), this database is so botched up it's as if it were being held together with bubble gum and bailing wire. As it is the db has more work-around "fixes" and "patches" than an knitted afghan has stitches. Your "fix" is going to cause several more "fixes" for the sake of an "accurate" disc count which is forever unattainable with this db and at the cost of more and accurate data. The only way to "fix" this mess is to start over with a redesigned db and you know it. So, let this "accurate disc count" fantasy go. | | | | Dan | | | | Last edited: by Dan W |
| | Registered: March 13, 2007 | | Posts: 21,610 |
| | Posted: | | | | | | | ASSUME NOTHING!!!!!!
CBE, MBE, MoA and proud of it.
Outta here
Billy Video |
| | Registered: March 13, 2007 | | Posts: 21,610 |
| | Posted: | | | | I actually gotten used to being the lone voice of sanity here. It's really too bad you guys don't get it. i won't support it...'nuff said.
Skip | | | ASSUME NOTHING!!!!!!
CBE, MBE, MoA and proud of it.
Outta here
Billy Video |
| | Dan W | | Registered: May 9, 2002 |
| Registered: March 13, 2007 | | Posts: 980 |
| | Posted: | | | | | | | | Dan | | | | Last edited: by Dan W |
| | Dan W | | Registered: May 9, 2002 |
| Registered: March 13, 2007 | | Posts: 980 |
| | Posted: | | | | Quoting skipnet50: Quote:
I actually gotten used to being the lone voice of sanity here. It's really too bad you guys don't get it. i won't support it...'nuff said.
Skip It's you who doesn't get it! | | | | Dan |
| | Registered: March 13, 2007 | | Posts: 21,610 |
| | Posted: | | | | No I get it just fine, the data that you CLAIM we can achieve through Phantom discs, ONLY works if you have ONE movie per side, if you have more than one movie per side all bets are off, and you gain nothing other than creating the Phantom Disc. The data with regard to Video, Audio, subs and so on will come. In the meantime, let's NOT make a scramble hash out of the database in order to achieve some short-term goal that will be fixed and require a LOT of worl to set it back right again..
Skip | | | ASSUME NOTHING!!!!!!
CBE, MBE, MoA and proud of it.
Outta here
Billy Video | | | | Last edited: by Winston Smith |
| | Dan W | | Registered: May 9, 2002 |
| Registered: March 13, 2007 | | Posts: 980 |
| | Posted: | | | | Quoting skipnet50: Quote:
No I get it just fine, the data that you CLAIM we can achieve through Phantom discs, ONLY works if you have ONE movie per side, if you have more than one movie per side all bets are off, and you gain nothing other than creating the Phantom Disc. The data with regard to Video, Audio, subs and so on will come. In the meantime, let's NOT make a scramble hash out of the database in order to achieve some short-term goal that will be fixed and require a LOT of worl to set it back right again..
Skip Actually, the scramble hash has already been made. The "phantom disc" problem that you are attempting to create is just that. Something you are creating. Can we all say, "Wag the Dog"? When Ken set it up so that we can't attach movies to our profiles the problem began. If it's the disc count you are concerned with, work on that portion of the program. Leave the data alone. Each Disc ID that is entered gets a profile. There's no avoiding that. What the program has to do is be smart enough (or be told to be smart enough) to list sides A & B of the same disc as two parts of the same disc. No BS about "phantom discs" just make the program count them properly. | | | | Dan |
|
|
|
Invelos Forums->DVD Profiler: Contribution Discussion |
Page:
1 2 3 4 5 ...8 Previous Next
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
 |