| Author |
Message |
| Registered: March 19, 2007 | Reputation:  |  Posts: 6,018 |
| | Posted: | | | | It may be very difficult to capture these situations in a set of rules.
I will say one thing: if 3D is going to be allowed in some titles, then IMHO it ought to be compulsory to use the Original Title field for, well, the original title without any 3D epitaph. |
|
| Registered: March 29, 2007 | Reputation:  |  Posts: 2,749 |
| | Posted: | | | | So it looks like we are going to disregard the title the studio gave it on screen and make it what we want. | | | | Marty - Registered July 10, 2004, User since 2002. |
|
  | T!M | | Profiling since Dec. 2000 |
| Registered: March 13, 2007 | | Reputation: | | Posts: 8,736 |
| | Posted: | | | | Quoting dee1959jay: Quote:
I will say one thing: if 3D is going to be allowed in some titles, then IMHO it ought to be compulsory to use the Original Title field for, well, the original title without any 3D epitaph. Indeed. The original title is needed to ensure that the CLT doesn't count the 3D and 2D versions as two different titles. |
|
| Registered: March 13, 2007 | Reputation:  | | Posts: 3,321 |
| | Posted: | | | | Quoting mreeder50: Quote:
So it looks like we are going to disregard the title the studio gave it on screen and make it what we want. Really? It looks to me like Ken is coming to the users asking for input and received almost no responses. I think THIS is the time to raise your concerns before it is decided that we'll be doing something you don't care for. Personally, I'm not a fan of adding 3D unless it's part of the original title (such as Jaws 3-D). If it's not part of the original title, then it seems to me that its purpose on the cover is to identify the different releases, thus making it an Edition. I don't care if 3D appears on the top of the case or if a graphic artist found a fun way to integrate in into the cover and/or title. When you go to the movies, you don't have to choose between Movie and Movie 3D. You choose if you're going to see Movie in traditional 2D or in 3D. Either way it's the same movie with the same title. It's just projected differently. I prefer to catalog the films in my collection, not whatever cutsie names some bored artist came up with. Star Trek 3D is not a film (yet) and never has been. It's Star Trek in a 3D format. | | | Get the CSVExport and Database Query plug-ins here.
Create fake parent profiles to organize your collection. |
|
| Registered: March 20, 2007 | | Reputation: | | Posts: 2,851 |
| | Posted: | | | | Quoting Ken Cole: Quote:
This is for titles such as this:
Preliminarily, I'd lean towards 3D as the edition in this kind of case. Open to discussion. I agree. If it's unambiguously integrated into the title then use it there, but if there's doubt use 3D as the edition. --------------- |
|
| Registered: March 14, 2007 | | Reputation: |  Posts: 4,678 |
| | Posted: | | | | Quoting scotthm: Quote:
If it's unambiguously integrated into the title then use it there, but if there's doubt use 3D as the edition. That would be my preference, too. | | | My freeware tools for DVD Profiler users.
Gunnar |
|
| Registered: March 29, 2007 | | Reputation: | | Posts: 2,749 |
| | Posted: | | | | Quoting Mark Harrison: Quote:
Really? It looks to me like Ken... I am in complete agreement with you here 3D, other than movies like Jaws 3-D, is an edition. | | | | Marty - Registered July 10, 2004, User since 2002. |
|
| Registered: March 13, 2007 | Reputation:  |  Posts: 1,774 |
| | Posted: | | | | Quoting GSyren: Quote:
Quoting scotthm:
Quote:
If it's unambiguously integrated into the title then use it there, but if there's doubt use 3D as the edition.
That would be my preference, too. +1 |
|
| Registered: March 19, 2007 | | Reputation: | | Posts: 6,018 |
| | Posted: | | | | +1 Of course, this would imply that subsequently we can start arguing about when something is unambiguous and when it is not.  | | | | Last edited: by dee1959jay |
|
| Registered: May 29, 2007 | | Reputation: | | Posts: 3,475 |
| | Posted: | | | | Data that is open to interpretation is bound to cause problems.
I would prefer that this data always go in the Edition field - this way there can not be any debates or personal interpretations. |
|
| Registered: March 13, 2007 | | Reputation: | | Posts: 17,334 |
| | Posted: | | | | I have to disagree with that Kathy... when it is obviously integrated into the title liken the sxample I showed (A Very Harold and Kumar 3D Christmas) then it should be in the title field exactly per the cover. No different then There is Something More About Mary. | | | | Pete |
|
| Registered: March 13, 2007 | | Reputation: | | Posts: 137 |
| | Posted: | | | | 3D as the edition | | | | Len |
|
| Registered: March 10, 2007 | | Posts: 4,282 |
| | Posted: | | | | In general, if 3D follows the title on the cover, I'd say it's the edition. For cross-check, the credit block can be used, as we do with possessives.
Thoughts? Any specific cases come to mind that make this ambiguous? | | | | Invelos Software, Inc. Representative | | | | Last edited: by Ken Cole |
|
| Registered: March 13, 2007 | | Reputation: | | Posts: 17,334 |
| | Posted: | | | | If you are going to put this in the rules I would suggest making it clear if it is within the title to use it as part of the title. Only when it is at the end should it be moved to the edition. | | | | Pete |
|
| Registered: March 13, 2007 | | Reputation: | | Posts: 13,202 |
| | Posted: | | | | I agree with Pete. | | | No dictator, no invader can hold an imprisoned population by force of arms forever.
There is no greater power in the universe than the need for freedom.
Against this power, governments and tyrants and armies cannot stand.
The Centauri learned this lesson once.
We will teach it to them again.
Though it take a thousand years, we will be free.
- Citizen G'Kar |
|
| Registered: March 29, 2007 | | Reputation: | | Posts: 2,749 |
| | Posted: | | | | I think the only way 3D or 3-D should be incorporated into the title is if it appears onscreen as such, otherwise it should be an edition.
My 2 pennies. | | | | Marty - Registered July 10, 2004, User since 2002. |
|