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 69samael69 Page: 1 2 3  Previous   Next
Message Details
Quoting widescreenforever:
Quote:
what the best resolution for scanning  .. ?  200 /  300  or 600 ?    I've found that 600 takes too long to scan and 300 seemed better than 200..  my dilemma is my scans are not 'bright'  enough but  little cloudy_dull .. then I have to tweek -majorly  with some paid  software to try and bring back the same brilliance as original..

My scans aren't the best either as I don't have a great quality scanner. I go on the premise that a mediocre quality scan is probably better than no scan at all.

Typically, I scan at 600dpi, then crop/resize/rotate the image as needed to 700px tall. Some scanners have advanced setting that will let you adjust brightness levels on the scan. If you want to do post scan processing, windows Paint won't adjust brightness/contrast, but there are lots of free picture editors out there that will, such as Pixlr or Splashup.
Posted:
Topic Replies: 5, Topic Views: 271
Thanks. It's the first time I've encountered the same UPC. I've used it lots for alternates on disk ID as my focus over the last year has been largely on adding content to box sets. Just wanted to confirm as it's always a pain when you contribute something only to have it rejected.
Posted:
Topic Replies: 3, Topic Views: 117
What's the accepted practice here? One added with the UPC and the other using and alternate UPC? Both are legitimate releases and from the same company, Unearthed Films. What makes it more interesting is the fact that one is also a box set, which is, incidentally not done properly, so I'll fix that as well.

UPC 820360-101892
Guinea Pig: Mermaid in a Manhole/He Never Dies
Guinea Pig - Flower of Flesh and Blood: Director's Cut

Flower of Flesh and Blood does exist under different UPCs, presumably later releases that fixed the UPC error, but not the one I have, which was purchased at release. Incidentally, this film comes with a making of feature that the film makers were forced to provide because Charlie Sheen reported it to the FBI, thinking it was a real snuff film. I believe they also had to produce the actors in court to prove that no one was actually dead. 
Posted:
Topic Replies: 3, Topic Views: 117
Quoting The Movieman:
Quote:
Quoting jfrench:
Quote:
Hi,
I'm not sure about the Canada reference in the post title, but judging by the image, Australia seems more like it.




  I live in Canada. I'm typically about 1 out of 7 won't exist in the database. b-grade horror/scifi closer to 1 out of 4 with perhaps 1 out of 50 not existing in the DB at all under any UPC/locality. Canadian box sets rarely have children added properly. For a LONG time if something didn't exist, I simply went and found a different release that matched. Now, my intent is to add all the missing profiles so if I ever have to rescan again, it'll be a simple chore of zap...zap...zap. This is only about 1/4 of the collection.
Posted:
Topic Replies: 5, Topic Views: 271
Rescanned ~700 titles last night and well over 100 did not exist in the DB. I have some work to do. 

Posted:
Topic Replies: 5, Topic Views: 271
What about foreign titles? for the sake of argument, say there was Grudge/Grudge 2 box set. At the box set level, original title could be used to say Ju On/Ju On 2. Would that be acceptable use? Now what if it's two unrelated movies? I guess one must resort to Title A / Title B. What if, again, they're two foreign movies, say The Grudge / Pulse. Would original title as "Ju On / Kairo" be acceptable at the box set level? I don't consider it incorrect as the box set should be allowed to inherit some information from it's content. Perhaps I'm misunderstanding the intent/use of "Original Title".

Technically, more than likely, the box set itself never had the title Grudge/Grudge 2, it's just something descriptive and it has to be entered as something. Myself, I would prefer, where possible, it be entered something like "The Grudge Collection" or "The Grudge Double Feature" as it's tidier to look at and more consistent with the naming convention for larger collections. Sometimes names must be necessarily vague. Take something like this one, 096009-203443, and all you can do is give it the name "10 Horror Movies", which isn't very descriptive, but it's all you have and not feasible to list them all in the same title. Take 883904-226444, for instance. It's in the database as "The Curse / Curse 2: The Bite: Horror Double Feature". Personally, I would prefer it be entered as "The Curse : Horror Double Feature". It's not like individual titles are listed in the box set title for larger collections, like this one, 065935-572367, "The Crow: DVD Quadruple Feature". So why should they be for doubles?
Posted:
Topic Replies: 11, Topic Views: 545
I keep meaning to do the same. Go though and purge out some titles, more to make some space than anything. Kid's cartoons too. They've gotten too old for many of them. Now, I only have about 2400 titles and have unboxed ~700 and put them in to a disk storage unit...and I still have space issues.  I can't imagine 8800 titles. Must be pretty overwhelming Good luck.
Posted:
Topic Replies: 10, Topic Views: 1209
Quoting LJG:
Quote:
At one time, there was a plugin that was designed to help you audit your discs. You'd use a scanner to read the bar codes and it would compare it to your database. It would show UPCs that were not in the database and show ones that hadn't been re-scanned. I only audited mine once and it's been quite awhile but I know I found a handful of titles like you mentioned-ones where I must have just picked a title that was close to mine. It also found a couple that hadn't been added. I'm pretty sure it did export files into another program, excel maybe? but I'm not 100% sure.

I wish I could remember the name of it, but over the years, I seem to have deleted it or lost it from my copy of Profiler. I did a quick search for it, but nothing popped up: maybe someone will remember from my description?


Thanks. That would be nice, then I wouldn't lose things like date added and sequence number, place of purchase, things like that. I'll check out the DVD Inventory thing DJ Doena mentioned and see if it does what I need.
Posted:
Topic Replies: 11, Topic Views: 563
Thanks MediaDog. The big problem I have is that I've never rescanned in the 15-16 years I've been using DVDP. I know I've lost things or sold things that I've never removed and I'm sure there's probably stuff there that I've bought and forgot to add. I also know that early on, if I came across titles that didn't exist, common for Canadian versions back in the early days, I would just find a different UPC that matched, and I'd like to fix those as well. Even now, it's not uncommon, but I create the profiles now.
Posted:
Topic Replies: 11, Topic Views: 563
Thanks.
Posted:
Topic Replies: 11, Topic Views: 563
I'm thinking about rescanning my entire 2300+ collection from scratch. I know, over the years, there have been things missed, lost and replaced/sold, but not removed that have never been updated in my DB and figure this is probably the most efficient way to fix all of that in one swoop. How would I go about purging my current DVDP database?
Posted:
Topic Replies: 11, Topic Views: 563
^^^^^^^^^^^
This is why I always stick to just the technical details and never touch the cast and crew other than to copy it from one profile to another...I simply don't care that much. I leave cast/crew to those whom it matters more to. I would want Gerard Depardieu to show up onthe same list as Gérard Depardieu and would change local data to make that happen, which defeats the purpose IMO.
Posted:
Topic Replies: 27, Topic Views: 4459
I only use IMDB to check to see the year a movie was released, if it's not on the cover, or obviously not correct. I like to think they can at least that bit of information consistently correct. 
Posted:
Topic Replies: 27, Topic Views: 4459
Quoting surfeur51:
Quote:
In fact rules ask to recopy exactly data on covers or credits. So if there is a spelling mistake in an overview, you "must" keep it in profile you contribute. And if the overview for a space opera describes a peplum, you "must" keep the peplum description. And when credits list GERARD DEPARDIEU, you "must" enter Gerard Depardieu, even if everybody knows it is Gérard, and even if it will break the linking for this actor. So, I agree with you that contributors should correct incorrect data, but a majority here decided that contributing errors was the thing to do. That is the reason why I stopped contributing, though I was in the past considered as a good contributor by Invelos (shown by near my name).


Now, I asked recently about incorrect cover data, specifically run time and the year the movie was made, and was told to ignore the cover and use what was correct, as long as I cited the source. i.e. IMDB or by playing the physical disk. Why should that be any different for mis-punctuated names or spelling mistakes?

I just did Warlock a couple weeks ago and this was the description on the submission, and it got released, "Canadian version of the DVD release. There is a time discrepancy on the cover. NOTE: The cover says the movie is 92 minutes. It is actually 103 minutes as every source says and I confirmed it by playing the movie. Cast/Crew from: 031398684336"
Posted:
Topic Replies: 27, Topic Views: 4459
Having a bad string of luck here. Just got 5 movies in from amazon and only 2 of the UPCs exist in the database. At least they're all there in the DB, so making copies will be quick.
Posted:
Topic Replies: 27, Topic Views: 4459
Quoting mediadogg:
Quote:
Quoting pantallicarox:
Quote:
Very cool, If I get some free time this weekend I'll crank some out. Thanks

Just a reminder. There is a way to check to see which profiles are in process. I don't contribute often, so I once did a bunch of wasted work by not checking the in process queue.

I've only had this happen once, but might be useful to check occasionally, if I'm going to do a blitz. Where is said tool?
Posted:
Topic Replies: 8, Topic Views: 2084
Quoting Jimmy S:
Quote:
Quoting surfeur51:
Quote:
Of course yes, and I would recommand 4.0. It allows to enter more data than 3.9, and has quite no limitation, since I mainly use it as a "local only" program.


Is it that reliable? I ask because I think 3.9 works fine (except for the "credited as" who doesn't work for the crew when you create a profile) and I fear non-sense was added to 4.0 (and I can't check since the update list in the download area is out of date).


I don't know what was all added to 4.0, but I haven't had problems with it. There are a couple little things I've come across, like flag counts not resetting properly, but that will come. The big thing with 4 for me is the addition of 4K/UHD support. If you don't require this and are concerned about bloated features, then maybe stick with 3.9 until 4.0 has had a few bug fix updates.
Posted:
Topic Replies: 14, Topic Views: 3653
I've withdrawn them, I'll correct the titles and editions tonight and resubmit them. Thanks again all for the opinions.
Posted:
Topic Replies: 7, Topic Views: 1520
Out of curiosity, I downloaded the Collectorz demo and it's database appears to be even more incomplete. I checked 3 box sets I recently submitted to DVDP, one didn't exist in their database and the other two were incomplete.  It also doesn't appear to do box sets very well. Of the 6 or so box set I randomly looked at NONE of them listed the contents in any logical way, so DVDP is still, by far the superior product.
Posted:
Topic Replies: 27, Topic Views: 4459
Quoting surfeur51:
Quote:
Quoting eommen:
Quote:
Which means that the on-line database content depends a lot more on just a few contributors than you might imagine.

Many people who were used to contribute in the past have stopped when rules asked to recopy errors, and in certain cases, asked to add errors (especially spelling mistakes in names). People who want to have correct profiles, and also want to contribute, have to build profiles with incorrect data, then correct them for their own database.
So what did, in fact, people who want to have correct profiles ? They just stopped contributing...


I submit the correct data to the best of my ability, and will fix errors on profiles I find to have errors...if it's violation of the rules, then the rules need to be fixed, otherwise they can choose to decline the submission, but I'll not submit data I know to be incorrect, no matter what the rules say.
Posted:
Topic Replies: 27, Topic Views: 4459
That's kind of what I was thinking, whether we lost a couple of the primary contributors here in Canada. Makes me sad to think it relies on so few people. I also think we may have lost some of these hard core users just this last year with the LONG delay in getting 4K support out. It certainly felt like an abandoned product for a while and I really did find it hard to recommend it to people.

I haven't been doing it long, maybe 2 years since I started doing regular contributions, so I only have a couple hundred, but that would probably be 80% new profiles. I have looked at other tools, but they tend to be expensive and last time I did comparisons, their databases seemed no more complete, at least for what I collect. Like some others here, I've been using DVDP since version 1.0 I think, back in the Intervocative days.

I hear ya on the rules, clear direction on some things would be nice. I know Ken is basically a one man show, and he's not charging very much for the software, so we can't expect a great deal of support, but not maintaining this stuff or not making decision on contentious issues isn't doing anyone any good. Does Ken do all the document maintenance himself? What does the "Contribution Rules Committee" do? I, personally, would like to see a minimum set of required data. (I'm an Oracle DBA by profession and these empty contributions drive me up the wall.) The thing I care about most are the visual aspects, things like cover scans, features, rating, technical details, etc. should be required, otherwise the profile automatically rejected. I'll admit, I'm guilty of never doing cast/crew myself. If I can't copy another profile, I leave it blank. I do everything else, but the rules surrounding the sourcing of cast/crew information just make it too time consuming. My wife would have my head. I understand why the rules are there, but I just don't usually have that kind of time.

As you say, it is tedious and time consuming though. I think it took me 40 minutes to do that Paranormal Activity box set (So, 7 new profiles) last night and most of the technical information was already correct in the profiles I chose to copy. Would have taken much longer if I had to enter all the technical details such as audio tracks and special features. I don't know what the answer is or how to better streamline things, but there are things in the software itself that make me scratch my head, like why changing region/UPC is only in the pull-down and not on the right-click context menu. Same with copy and paste, which I only JUST discovered even existed, because I never go to the pull-downs if I can help it. That should be in the right-click context menu. In reality, the right-click on title menu and DVD pull-down should be identical.
Posted:
Topic Replies: 27, Topic Views: 4459
Excellent.  I'll withdraw it and resubmit it tonight, or I'll just submit an amendment if it's already been approved. New additions tend to get approved very quickly.
Posted:
Topic Replies: 7, Topic Views: 1520
Out of curiosity, based on the cover should the title be

"Paranormal Activity: The Ultimate Collection"

or

"The Ultimate Paranormal Activity Collection"

Following the format of other contributions, I used "Paranormal Activity: The Ultimate Collection".



That said...it's not very "ultimate" since part 3 is not the extended version...the title should read "almost ultimate". 
Posted:
Topic Replies: 7, Topic Views: 1520
For brand new movies, like those you mentioned, I usually wait a month or two for someone else to do them, after that, if they're still sitting under my desk not entered, I'll do them myself. I still have 4K versions of John Wick 2, Resident Evil: The final Chapter, Ghost in the Shell and Star Trek Beyond there and another 11 DVDs to do. Being in Canada, AND being a fan of b-movie horror, I get A LOT of movies that haven't been contributed. For what I typically buy, probably 1 out of 10 don't exist in the database at all under any UPC or region. Box sets are another thing that tend to be be notoriously bad and usually need some TLC. Sometimes it's just easier to contribute than it is to wait and have those disks segregated. I used to wait, but just started doing it. You get in a groove and it just kind of moves along. I won't pretend my contributions are perfect, but certainly better than not there at all. 
Posted:
Topic Replies: 8, Topic Views: 2084
When I have this logo on a 4K case, is that the same as the HDR10 option in DVDP? They both use the same little rainbow logo.

Posted:
Topic Replies: 6, Topic Views: 1213
Invelos Forums->Posts by 69samael69 Page: 1 2 3  Previous   Next