Quoting Dr Pavlov:

Quote:
I haven't seen any comment from them, one way or the other, Neil. I have started using your system as it makes sense, BUT then I am not Contributing very much either.

Skip

I'll continue to do them locally too, if they are no longer allowed to be submitted.

Quoting T!M:

Quote:
Quoting TomGaines:

Quote:
In general I do not list Visual Effects credits listed under Effects companies, when there is a general Visual Effects Supervisor credited (usually in the opening credits). In my opinion the Effects companies listings should be handled like 2nd Unit credits and thus not relevant for DVD Profiler.

I don't have too many effects-heavy films, but this post sums op my outlook on the issue quite nicely. My problem with allowing this kind of stuff into the database is that it simply forces anyone who wishes to contribute further changes to such a profile to allow all this into his database, whether he likes it or not. Those who choose not to (a sizeable percentage in this poll alone), are basically shut off from ever contributing to the crew section of such a profile ever again. That's my main problem.

My fear is that we're getting far too specialized, to the point that we'll only have about five users ever contributing crew data anymore. I feel the database should be a starting point for everyone, and this kind of ultra-specialized approach really doesn't ring "general starting point" to me.

ROFLMAO and those five doing it wrong.

Skip

Quoting Unicus69:

Quote:
If someone really wants to contribute, they will deal with it.

"If someone really wants to contribute, they will deal with it", is, in my humble opinion, not exactly the best approach for what this is, namely: a user-built database. I'd think that if you're maintaining a user-built database, you'd want to have as many users as possible participating in the contribution process, rather than restricting it to just a few people that somehow really, really want to... 

Quoting Unicus69:

Quote:
Well, all this 'credited as' stuff doesn't ring general starting point to me.

To me it certainly does. We all know that the average user wants, even expects, that clicking on a name in DVD Profiler automatically brings up each and every one of that person's other credits in their database. No doubt you'll come back with "and just how do you know that?", but come on: you really do know that's what the vast majority of the userbase want. As I said earlier: that is, arguably, the sole reason to collect cast and crew data in this format - else we might as well store JPEGs of the credits. We don't, but we do it like this so we can actually USE the data. Now, obviously there are many different opinions on how to get there, and we can obviously talk for hours about the pros and cons of the "credited as" system, what improvements are needed, or how it should be handled instead (let's not do that right now, okay?), but if you're going to argue that most users don't care about linking, then we've lost all basis to talk. Because it's just not true, and you know it.

At the same time, we know (from various polls, even) that rather a lot of users have simply "given up" on crew data because they feel it's become too complicated. This doesn't help, IMHO. Anyway, I just wanted to state my intention with one single post; I had no intention of starting an argument. You seem to jump on just about everything I say, but again, like everyone else in this thread, I was merely stating my opinion, which is, that I happen to agree with TomGaines that for the purposes of the online database, we should restrict ourselves to the "main" visual effects supervisor and leave the rest out. Additionally, I feel we should be very wary of getting too detailed. As others have pointed out; if we're doing this, then where does it end? The next thing is going to be similar dividers for sound crew as well, as that's the exact same situation, and no doubt we'll soon hit the moment that we're going to have to do this WITHIN episode dividers in TV sets... 

Quoting Unicus69:

Quote:
Please stick to a single topic.  We aren't talking about how we use the data, we are talking about how we contribute the data to give everybody a general starting point.  If you really want to encourage more people to contribute, then you have to make it as easy as possible.  The easiest way to contribute data is to enter exactly what you see, no more, no less.

You don't like company dividers, that's fine I have no problem with that.  Where I have a problem, and it is why I responded to you and not Tom, is in your saying they shouldn't be allowed because it will prevent some peope from contributing.  Well, 'Credited as', while it makes the date more useful, could do the exact same thing so that argument rings a tad hollow with me.

I have to agree with you Unicus (sorry Tim  ) in that the Credited As feature is more of an advanced function. I tried to use it when I first started but actually used it incorrectly because I had initially not even known that CLT had to be used. I didn't even know what those "John Smith 66/75" numbers meant. I am just now going back through my initial contributions and doing using the Credited As feature correctly and really don't blaim the mass majority of people not using it.

So with that said, I agree that this topic of Divider use isn't for beginners in the least bit. But as with Credited As, it could be an option for those inclined to do it the advanced way.  It's not like everyone making a contribution would have it declined if it didn't follow the divider format. I've spent the last few months adding episode specific dividers for TV shows, and they were previously accepted as one big cast list, so I see this in much the same light.

For the record though, I really do like what you've done Pantheon, it looks great and would love to see this in my database regarless of whether I would do this kind of work myself. 

While they might be useless to you, clearly, they are not useless to everybody as the poll also indicates that half of the users are interested.  In addition, why should we have to bow to those that are not?

Quoting tweeter:

Quote:
The existing crew data is already overloaded and the addition of data fields that aren't programmatically linked to related crew members is just so much flotsam cluttering up my screen.

I think any additional data added should be of obvious benefit to more than a simple majority (or significant minority) before being added.  Some sort of super majority should be required.

I wasn't around when the Credited As field was added so i can't compare before and after.  But I'd happily sacrifice it on line and submit As Credited only to keep these dividers out of the database, if that was what it took.

As a contributor i know having to deal with Effects Company Dividers would be enough extra work that i wouldn't bother.  I'd deal with them by not contributing.

Just my opinion.

I wasn't aware that it was being requested that they are compulsory to use these? But merely allowed.

You are free to not add them - but they shouldn't be removed if they are already there from a previous contribution (and you are making a new crew contribution). They are additional information (and the poll indicates wanted by just under 50% of the voters).

You are of course able to remove these from your own database.

Quoting pauls42:

Quote:
I wasn't aware that it was being requested that they are compulsory to use these? But merely allowed.

You are free to not add them - but they shouldn't be removed if they are already there from a previous contribution (and you are making a new crew contribution). They are additional information (and the poll indicates wanted by just under 50% of the voters).

You are of course able to remove these from your own database.

Well said.