 |
|
|
|
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->DVD Profiler: Contribution Discussion |
Page:
1... 5 6 7 8 9 ...11  Previous Next
|
|
Anthony [Stewart] Head: common name? |
|
|
|
|
|
| Author |
Message |
| Registered: January 1, 2009 | Reputation:  |  Posts: 3,087 |
| | Posted: | | | | Quoting Addicted2DVD: Quote:
...
But this does bring up a question I always wondered... if we are to count TV Series per season... What happens when the name changes in the middle of the season. Yes... this does happen at times... and the possibilities of it happening more often is high now that a lot of shows don't do an opening anymore... just a title card and the stars are added in the same way as the guest stars... who appears as the show begins.
So if counting by season... and say (just as an example.. not saying really a case)... in some episodes within the season says Courteney Cox and others (later in a season probably) says Courteney Cox Arquette... when doing a common name thread. How is the correct way.
IMO I would think that as long as she is credited both ways within the season both credits are correct and the 1 season gets counted as both names. I mean after all... as long as that is what the credits say... it should count as one for each name. Can also happen at movies in which one person is credited twice (different roles or cast/crew) with a different credit. I also think both variants shoul get the count. (That's how the CLT also does, because it just uses the credited as field) Edit: Typing too slow.  But now I can also add this: Quoting Corne: Quote:
...Just counting per fragment is the most absurd thing to do. ... It's not very useful imho. Here I agree. But it is not absurd as it is nearly the way the CLT counts them. (Because of the way how we enter TV series and the current version of the programm) But my point in my post was for the quoted post: You can not count one way and say that's the winner and forget to do this for the other variant also. | | | | Last edited: by VirusPil |
|   | Corne | | Registered: Nov. 1, 2000 |
| Registered: April 5, 2007 |  Posts: 1,059 |
| | Posted: | | | | Quoting Corne: Quote:
Quoting Addicted2DVD:
Quote:
Reading over this thread... all I can say is wow.
I personally always thought it should be per episode... as that is how the credits are shown... for each and every episode. But I do understand that isn't easily done since profiler don't count that way... it counts per profile.
But this does bring up a question I always wondered... if we are to count TV Series per season... What happens when the name changes in the middle of the season. Yes... this does happen at times... and the possibilities of it happening more often is high now that a lot of shows don't do an opening anymore... just a title card and the stars are added in the same way as the guest stars... who appears as the show begins.
So if counting by season... and say (just as an example.. not saying really a case)... in some episodes within the season says Courteney Cox and others (later in a season probably) says Courteney Cox Arquette... when doing a common name thread. How is the correct way.
IMO I would think that as long as she is credited both ways within the season both credits are correct and the 1 season gets counted as both names. I mean after all... as long as that is what the credits say... it should count as one for each name.
Simple, both names counting as one. We do the same for crew/cast that are credited more than once but differently. For example if Person X is credited as Make-up Artist as X and later on the credits he's credited as Y for Make-up Effects... Recently I had such a thing, I will look it up! For example: Sleepaway Camp (1983) Production Design by William Billowit Special Effects Coordinator - Bill Billowit FYI his common name is William Billowit  | | | | Cor |
| | Registered: March 13, 2007 | | Reputation: |  Posts: 17,334 |
| | Posted: | | | | That is pretty much what I figured... it would be the only fair way to do it. | | | | Pete |
| | Registered: April 7, 2007 |  Posts: 357 |
| | Posted: | | | | I find myself in the silly position of thinking it's Anthony Head, because of all the logic behind the argument. But I agree the rules and the clarifying forum posts indicate go with the CLT unless it's wrong. However to me it indicates ignoring CLT where there are lot's of incorrect entries (Which is how we solve other CLT issues) and that is not the case here, the CLT count is part of the underlying structure of the database how it counts is by design and can be changed by the owners of the database to give the count they want, if they wanted to ignore disk level profiles of TV series they could change that but they haven't QED. After all if they appear in only one episode in a an entire TV season for 10 seconds we count the credit, so why not count per episode or at least per disk?
But most of all it doesn't matter at all so long as it's linked. It is arbitrary and the key thing is that should never be able to be changed. The only people who could want that are people who get a kick out of changing dozens of profiles for no good reason. | | | | Last edited: by Graveworm |
| | Registered: March 14, 2007 | | Reputation: |  Posts: 4,678 |
| | Posted: | | | | Quoting T!M: Quote:
Quoting GSyren:
Quote:
And given that the CLT counts episodes [...]
Quick reality check: it doesn't. Instead, it counts whatever is released and has a distinctive original title. That release may be of one particular episode (some shows have their pilot released as a stand-alone disc, for instance), it may be a "best of" compilation, it may be of a single season, it may be of two (or more) seasons combined, and then there may, or may not be (since they're optional) child profiles that can be counted again. It counts all that, but it certainly does not count episodes.
Quote:
If we should count by season, the CLT should be modified to count by season.
If you look at it, you'll find that it actually attempts to do that. Unfortunately, it relies on all copies of such seasons to have the exact same original title to do so - and most users don't add that. That same problem is then multiplied by child profiles for many of these sets, quickly sending the CLT numbers into the hundreds. Whatever. My point is that we take the numbers that the CLT gives us and we use it to determine the common name. There is no need to overthink it. | | | My freeware tools for DVD Profiler users.
Gunnar |
| | T!M | | Profiling since Dec. 2000 |
| Registered: March 13, 2007 | | Reputation: | | Posts: 8,736 |
| | Posted: | | | | Quoting GSyren: Quote:
My point is that we take the numbers that the CLT gives us and we use it to determine the common name. That, again, simply isn't true. Regardless of the question how we count TV credits, we've never been after the name variant with simply the largest number of hits in the CLT. Instead, right from day one, we've always been, and still are, after the highest actual number of different titles, corrected for errors. Again: Ken encouraged that right from the start, and whenever the validity of common name-finding threads was questioned (whether they overrule the actual CLT numbers or not), he has always confirmed that (last time here). So no, we do not simply "take the numbers that the CLT gives us and use it to determine the common name". Never have. | | | | Last edited: by T!M |
| | Registered: April 7, 2007 | | Posts: 357 |
| | Posted: | | | | Quoting T!M: Quote:
Quoting GSyren:
Quote:
My point is that we take the numbers that the CLT gives us and we use it to determine the common name.
That, again, simply isn't true. Regardless of the question how we count TV credits, we've never been after the name variant with simply the largest number of hits in the CLT. . We have except in cases where it's slewed by incorrect ie not as per credits or by other cast crew with same name, we haven't decided which entries count and which entries don't before. Other wise the most recent might be more important than earlier work, or maybe it might depend on billing etc etc. It's a dangerous path to go. No one can explain why it matters though? It's only an arbitrary reference to enable linking. It could just as easiily be a randon number, indeed it might be better if it were. | | | | Last edited: by Graveworm |
| | Registered: March 29, 2007 | Reputation:  |  Posts: 4,479 |
| | Posted: | | | | Quoting T!M: Quote:
Ken encouraged that right from the start, and whenever the validity of common name-finding threads was questioned (whether they overrule the actual CLT numbers or not), he has always confirmed that (last time here). So no, we do not simply "take the numbers that the CLT gives us and use it to determine the common name". Never have. Ken has always said that CLT numbers may be corrected if credits in the profile do not match credits on screen : this is correction of errors. Nothing else which allow to modify correct (= as credited) results. | | | | Images from movies |
| | T!M | | Profiling since Dec. 2000 |
| Registered: March 13, 2007 | | Reputation: | | Posts: 8,736 |
| | Posted: | | | | @surfeur: my comment was about how we generally deal with CLT numbers - note that I prefixed my comment with the phrase "Regardless of the question how we count TV credits". So no need to get all excited, I'm afraid. Quoting Graveworm: Quote:
It could just as easiily be a randon number, indeed it might be better if it were. I can sure see how it would be easier. No more need for common name threads, for starters. I, for one, prefer what we have, but again: I can see how it would be easier. So if anyone wants to campaign for that - feel free. I just objected to the notion that that's what we do: we don't, and we never have - as Ken confirmed right from the start, and has confirmed several times since (see the link I just posted, for instance). So while I can see someone would suggest that, I just pointed out that it's decidedly not what we currently do. | | | | Last edited: by T!M |
| | Registered: March 14, 2007 | | Reputation: | | Posts: 4,678 |
| | Posted: | | | | Quoting T!M: Quote:
Regardless of the question how we count TV credits, we've never been after the name variant with simply the largest number of hits in the CLT. Instead, right from day one, we've always been, and still are, after the highest actual number of different titles, corrected for errors. That is not my perception. Like I said, the common name is just supposed to be a link. It is not supposed to indicate anything special. And it should be easily determined. And that's what the CLT numbers are for. It may not be the ideal way of determining a link name, but it is the best we have at this time. Any attempt to change the CLT numbers in order to count whatever else you think is relevant will only succeed in making the common names system more difficult to use. | | | My freeware tools for DVD Profiler users.
Gunnar |
| | T!M | | Profiling since Dec. 2000 |
| Registered: March 13, 2007 | | Reputation: | | Posts: 8,736 |
| | Posted: | | | | Quoting GSyren: Quote:
Like I said, the common name is just supposed to be a link. It is not supposed to indicate anything special. And it should be easily determined. As I just pointed out, "supposed" and "should" are the keywords here. You're making a suggestion, which is fine, but you're not describing what we currently have. One of the reasons why we don't just go by the hightest number, is that, due to the still-pretty-huge batch of IMDb-data in the database, and fresh IMDb-mined data still being dumped in the database on a daily basis, "just use the highest number no matter what" would essentially mean "just use the IMDb-name". To escape that, Ken has allowed us to correct the raw CLT numbers for errors using common name-finding threads. I agree with you that that makes "the common names system more difficult to use", but until Ken changes his mind, that is what we have. | | | | Last edited: by T!M |
| | Registered: April 7, 2007 | | Posts: 357 |
| | Posted: | | | | Quoting T!M: Quote:
Quoting GSyren:
Quote:
Like I said, the common name is just supposed to be a link. It is not supposed to indicate anything special. And it should be easily determined.
As I just pointed out, "supposed" and "should" are the keywords here. You're making a suggestion, which is fine, but you're not describing what we currently have. You linked to the definitive statement by Ken Ideally, the focus should be on making sure the Credited As field matches the credit. If that's the case, then the CLT results will be correct - no matter what the common name is.Seems clear to me, the CLT result is the common name unless there incorrect entries. Not some pecieved problem with the CLT internal mechanism. |
| | T!M | | Profiling since Dec. 2000 |
| Registered: March 13, 2007 | | Reputation: | | Posts: 8,736 |
| | Posted: | | | | Quoting Graveworm: Quote:
You linked to the definitive statement by Ken I did indeed, so would you please take a minute and read the whole thing? It was a common name-finding thread, and Addicted2DVD stepped in ( here) to question it's validity, misinterpreting an earlier post by Ken into believing we could no longer use common name-finding threads to overrule the actual CLT numbers. So he asked, and got, clarification from Ken: Quoting Ken Cole: Quote:
Quoting Addicted2DVD:
Quote:
Ken... if you see this... tell me I am reading too much into this... and threads like this to prove the CLT is wrong is still ok.
Yes, you are.  And that's the only, generic point I was making in the post that you quoted: that indeed, the findings from common name-finding threads explicitly do, per Ken, overrule the raw CLT numbers, instead of going by the highest number regardless. | | | | Last edited: by T!M |
| | Registered: April 7, 2007 | | Posts: 357 |
| | Posted: | | | | Quoting T!M: Quote:
And that's the only, generic point I was making in the post that you quoted: that indeed, the findings from common name-finding threads explicitly do, per Ken, overrule the raw CLT numbers, instead of going by the highest number regardless. This is not a thread like that. That was a thread that dealt with inaccurate cast and crew entries decieving the CLT. This is a thread about you not liking the way the CLT works. |
| | Registered: March 13, 2007 | | Reputation: | | Posts: 13,202 |
| | Posted: | | | | Quoting Corne: Quote:
Just counting per fragment is the most absurd thing to do. There are three realistic options: counting per episode, per season or a series as a whole. Personally I would go for per season because studios deal with series in seasons as well. So Ken or Gerri, what should we do? Count by episode, season or series? I am not sure where you are getting this, that studios deal with them in seasons. I can point to quite a few where the director will change from episode to episode. Writers can change from episode to episode. Cast can change from episode to episode. DoP, editor, makeup, production designer, costume designer, producer...they can all change on a per episode basis. The reality is, the studios treat each episode as a single production. | | | 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 13, 2007 | | Reputation: | | Posts: 13,202 |
| | Posted: | | | | Quoting GSyren: Quote:
Whatever. My point is that we take the numbers that the CLT gives us and we use it to determine the common name. There is no need to overthink it. From what I have seen, you are correct. To be honest, I don't see a whole lot of people using the 'credited as' field. When it happens, with the exception of the few users who participate in the common name threads, raw CLT numbers are the ones being used and, without exception, they are all getting approved. | | | 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 |
|
|
|
Invelos Forums->DVD Profiler: Contribution Discussion |
Page:
1... 5 6 7 8 9 ...11 Previous Next
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
 |