Author |
Message |
Registered: April 13, 2007 | Posts: 651 |
| Posted: | | | | I have searched this forum, and also browsed all headers to find this subject, but I couldn't find it. I mean I have seen this in a poll, but now that I need it, it's gone.. Anyway, I have recently watched all episodes of 24 season one, and I also wrote down the runningtime on each episode to check if my profilerdata was correct. The existing RT is set to 1009 minutes. When I added my RT from each episode, I first rounded all episodes to nearest minute, as it's done in ordinary movies, and I got 3 no votes, fair enough, because I had a feeling that I should add all episode RT together, and then round up or down to nearest whole minute. I withdrewed my first contribution, and added again, and came out with a total of 1004 minutes and 91 seconds. I then took 60 seconds of the 91 seconds, and added them to the 1004 minutes, so I got 1005 minutes and 31 seconds. Then I rounded up to 1006 minutes, since the 31 seconds should be rounded up to nearest minute. And I got one yes and one no vote. I mean this is the correct time, and how it should be done, but one voter said: "1 minute = 60 seconds! 1004:91 seems a bit odd to me. I believe the current running time is correct." In my contribution notes the second time I said: "Ok then, as you wish Now I added all episodes together, and got 1004:91 in total RT. I took the 60 seconds and added it so the RT will be 1005:31, and the total round up will be 1006 minutes.. so I missed with one round up minute in this way " Maybe I'm not expressing it correctly in my notes? I sent the no voter a PM to explain how I did it, but also wanted to hear what other people say about this. I'm not out to "get" anybody, but I'd like to clearify it so I can do it right the next time | | | "What's God?" "You know when you want something really bad and you wish for it?, God's the guy that ignores you" -The Island, Steve Buscemi |
|
Registered: March 14, 2007 | Reputation: | Posts: 6,744 |
| Posted: | | | | Simply state that you summed it up and came to 1005:31 which you rounded to 1006. Don't confuse people with 91 seconds | | | Karsten DVD Collectors Online
|
|
Registered: May 19, 2007 | Reputation: | Posts: 5,917 |
| Posted: | | | | Keep in mind that you can't add seconds as you can the minutes. Seconds is "base 60" so as soon as you add up to over 60, it resets back to zero and the minutes goes up by one. |
|
Registered: March 13, 2007 | Reputation: | Posts: 3,436 |
| Posted: | | | | We recently discussed the question in the " Best way to figure running time of a tv series?"... Other than that I agree with DJ Doena. While the result is correct and it is great that you are trying to explain the details of your calculation, it apparerently can be confusing too (I admit I had to reasd it twice myself...). So, jkeep it simple: Say that you added the runtimes of each episode and then rounded the result of that, which gave you 1006 minutes. | | | Achim [諾亞信; Ya-Shin//Nuo], a German in Taiwan. Registered: May 29, 2000 (at InterVocative) |
|
Registered: March 14, 2007 | Posts: 1,339 |
| Posted: | | | | Quoting Dr. Killpatient: Quote: Keep in mind that you can't add seconds as you can the minutes. Seconds is "base 60" so as soon as you add up to over 60, it resets back to zero and the minutes goes up by one. he did in fact do this... just after he added all the seconds together... that is why he pulled the 1 minute out of the 91 seconds... i would say that you should round after you add... so in fact your second contribution is correct, i would revise the notes however to simply state that you added each episode together then rounded up. | | | -JoN |
|
| Berak | Bibamus morieundum est! |
Registered: May 10, 2007 | Posts: 1,059 |
| Posted: | | | | OK - I am not a math expert, but I know that when adding minutes you have to use 60 as a "base". So; for the profile this thread refers to (24: Season 1) I have rechecked the running time of each episode, and here's the result; 1. 40:58 2. 41:17 3. 42:17 4. 41:33 5. 41:47 6. 42:17 7. 42:15 8. 42:16 9. 42:16 10. 42:15 11. 42:14 12. 42:14 13. 42:15 14. 41:46 15. 42:19 16. 41:48 17. 42:18 18. 42:20 19. 40:55 20. 42:18 21. 42:20 22. 42:20 23. 42:17 24. 42:16 This makes a total of 16 hours 48 minutes and 51 seconds which rounded up makes the total 1009 minutes. So, IMHO the contributed profile change from Benty is wrong... | | | Berak
It's better to burn out than to fade away! True love conquers all! |
|
Registered: March 13, 2007 | Reputation: | Posts: 3,321 |
| Posted: | | | | Quoting Berak: Quote: OK - I am not a math expert... I am, but I was lazy and pasted this into Excel. My results were: Quote: ...a total of 16 hours 48 minutes and 51 seconds... If Bentyman got a different answer, perhaps he started with different values. | | | Get the CSVExport and Database Query plug-ins here. Create fake parent profiles to organize your collection. | | | Last edited: by Mark Harrison |
|
Registered: March 14, 2007 | Posts: 3,830 |
| Posted: | | | | or one is using the NTSC version (R1) | | | Sources for one or more of the changes and/or additions were not submitted. Please include the sources for your changes in the contribution notes, especially for cast and crew additions. |
|
Registered: March 14, 2007 | Reputation: | Posts: 6,744 |
| Posted: | | | | Quoting Giga Wizard: Quote: or one is using the NTSC version (R1) But that would make it 5% slower, not faster. | | | Karsten DVD Collectors Online
| | | Last edited: by DJ Doena |
|
Registered: March 14, 2007 | Posts: 3,830 |
| Posted: | | | | 50 minutes more/less viewing time? | | | Sources for one or more of the changes and/or additions were not submitted. Please include the sources for your changes in the contribution notes, especially for cast and crew additions. | | | Last edited: by ? |
|
Registered: March 13, 2007 | Reputation: | Posts: 2,293 |
| Posted: | | | | Quoting DJ Doena: Quote: Quoting Giga Wizard:
Quote: or one is using the NTSC version (R1) But that would make it 5% slower, not faster. AIUI that only applies to film; stuff for TV should be the same I think | | | It is dangerous to be right in matters where established men are wrong |
|
Registered: March 14, 2007 | Posts: 2,366 |
| Posted: | | | | Quoting DJ Doena: Quote: Quoting Giga Wizard:
Quote: or one is using the NTSC version (R1) But that would make it 5% slower, not faster. Don't want to be a wise ass, but it's 4%. | | | Martin Zuidervliet
DVD Profiler Nederlands |
|
Registered: March 14, 2007 | Posts: 2,366 |
| Posted: | | | | Quoting Voltaire53: Quote: Quoting DJ Doena:
Quote: Quoting Giga Wizard:
Quote: or one is using the NTSC version (R1) But that would make it 5% slower, not faster.
AIUI that only applies to film; stuff for TV should be the same I think Yep, and it's called PAL speedup. | | | Martin Zuidervliet
DVD Profiler Nederlands | | | Last edited: by Daddy DVD |
|
Registered: March 14, 2007 | Reputation: | Posts: 6,744 |
| Posted: | | | | Quoting Martin_Zuidervliet: Quote: Quoting DJ Doena:
Quote: Quoting Giga Wizard:
Quote: or one is using the NTSC version (R1) But that would make it 5% slower, not faster. Don't want to be a wise ass, but it's 4%. Darn I thought PAL was 4% faster and thus NTSC had to be 5% slower. | | | Karsten DVD Collectors Online
|
|
| Berak | Bibamus morieundum est! |
Registered: May 10, 2007 | Posts: 1,059 |
| Posted: | | | | Since this is the Swedish release for 24: Season One, I would assume we both have the PAL version.. | | | Berak
It's better to burn out than to fade away! True love conquers all! |
|
Registered: March 14, 2007 | Reputation: | Posts: 6,744 |
| Posted: | | | | Quoting Berak: Quote: Since this is the Swedish release for 24: Season One, I would assume we both have the PAL version.. It is indeed unlikely that he has a NTSC version, I just wanted to point out that this would make it slower, not faster (1009 vs 1006) | | | Karsten DVD Collectors Online
|
|