Here's one for anyone that wants to offer an opinion...

I was auditing the new Blu-ray release of Phantasm tonight. The director's mom helped out on the film in many ways. She acted at least as the make-up artist, the costumer designer and the production designer. She doesn't have a lot of other credits in the system, there's only one other film, Kenny & Company where she's credited in the cast and in the crew (the director was her son again).

She used a pseudonym for pretty much everything apparently. I don't have Kenny & Company, so I can't validate the credit (if anyone wants to that's cool), but here's how her credits and pseudonyms (at least as they are in the system) break down.

Kate Coscarelli - Kenny & Company (Cast) CLT 1/1
S. T. Coscarelli - Kenny & Company (Crew: Executive Producer & Art Director) CLT 1/1
Shirley Mae - Phantasm (Crew: Make-up Artist) CLT 1/16
Shirl Quinlan - Phantasm (Crew: Costume Designer) CLT 1/16
S. Tyler - Phantasm (Crew: Production Designer) CLT 1/16

So, if the credits for Kenny & Company hold up (and it doesn't matter if they do or not, if she's credited as Kate Coscarelli for both cast and crew, or S. T. Coscarelli for both cast and crew, or different variants all together) then that means we have 1 Title in the system for each of the 5 pseudonyms she used on her son's films. Normally, not a problem. We'd pick the title with the most individual profiles and we have the common name. The problem here however, is she used 3 pseudonyms on a single film, and THAT film is the film in the system with the most individual profiles. Making the common name an actual three way tie.

So, what the hell do we do in this instance? Can't just pick one in the forums through a poll. The forums are used by what % of the users of the program. And even if someone did pick one, what's to stop someone else from coming in and saying "I want that one" and changing their profile or other profiles? (Not that I think this would happen, but hypothetically).

So, any thoughts?

And why hasn't a better system for cast and crew been developed after all this time?   

Quoting AiAustria:

Quote:
I made my mind clear here and .... Didn't make friends...

Though I was in general agreement with your proposal, I think the problem is not to make friends. I should be very glad to be hated by everybody here if it was the price to have a good linking database.

Quote:
And why hasn't a better system for cast and crew been developed after all this time?

A better system would be a good thing, but after years I think it is useless to hope to see it one day. Anyway the present system works perfectly, the proof is that locally one can get a database that works without problem. We just have to enter data that matches with the characteristics of the program. For example, to differentiate two persons with same name and same or unknown BY, we need a rule to build a fake BY. Much more easy to do than rewrite the program... A set of rules to enter a unique name for each person is also very easy to make... On the contrary, present rules are made to have several different identifiers for the same data... This nonsense is the only true reason of present mess.

Quoting surfeur51:

Quote:
Anyway the present system works perfectly

It doesn't work that well.

For example, you have the actor John Smith (1942) in your database. Now you add a new movie from the online that also has a John Smith () in it. Suddenly your new movie is containing John Smith (1942) without any kind of feedback.

The other way around also "works". You have a movie containing John Smith () and you add a new movie from the online that has a John Smith (1942). Again, without any kind of feedback both your movies have John Smith (1942).

You can test this very easily (create a new, empty test database). Create a manual profile and add the actors Cedric the Entertainer (1964) and Jack Black () to it. Now download a profile for Ice Age. Now Ice Age will have Cedric the Entertainer (1964) and your manual profile will have Jack Black (1969).

I agree with all this. The system works... as long as you never use the online... which is the only safe way to use DVDProfiler if you want correct data.

But once again, it is a rule problem. Rules say: Enter birth years only when necessary to differentiate between two actors with the same name. Suppose the rules say : Always use BY. When BY is unknown, here is what to do...
Then everything would work.

Quoting surfeur51:

Quote:
I agree with all this. The system works... as long as you never use the online...

I've long asked for "default locks" as a feature. What I do by now is this:

I add by UPC, but disable "Download from Invelos". Then I lock all the fields I fill up individually anyway (like cast, crew, genres, ...) and then I refresh the profile from Invelos.

This way I don't get data pollution in my local database but still get the online data like overviews and audio tracks and the like.

Even after doing a purge of unapproved birth years a few years ago, I keep finding unapproved birth years in my database. They make every credit change a huge ordeal as I then have to research all these birth years that popped up and see if they are correct and likely fix them a bunch of places if they aren't.

Quoting Merrik:

Quote:
So, any thoughts?

I'd enter each credit as credited and not worry about a common name or linking.

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

Quoting scotthm:

Quote:
Quoting Merrik:

Quote:
So, any thoughts?

I'd enter each credit as credited and not worry about a common name or linking.

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

Sounds good, but if you accept updates  then your local WILL be corrupted.  I never bothered with BYs and now that I'm actually going through my database I am finding so many errors.  Names that aren't approved for BYs in the database but somehow are in my local, which I never touched.

Ken is like George Lucas.  They both created something great, but both lost touch with their audience;  either don't care or are so unaware that their latest products are lacking what the loyal fanbase craves.

Unlike Lucas, I don't think Ken will be able to sell what he created for 4 Billion... or anywhere close.  But I think everyone posting here is a fan of DVDP, and we all hope to see continued support.  I understand it is a business for Ken, and I'm confused why he didn't pursue a subscription model for extra online features.  I would assume new clients are dwindling as physical media sales are only going down.  My suggestion is to include online & streaming media as a new media type. 

I have my own ideas on how DVDP should expand as do many, but it doesn't mean anything until Ken rolls it out.