| Invelos Forums->Posts by hydr0x |
Page:
1  Previous Next
|
| Message |
Details |
All of these, other examples are Eureka Video/Eureka Entertainment and Indicator/Powerhouse Films, have a special "problem". And to be honest, I haven't figured out my preferred way locally too. The issue is based in the fact that DVD Profiler seems to be missing one necessary field to truly track these fully, and people are creating workarounds.
The problem is "labels", often synonymous with "series" or "collections", but not always. Take Arrow. "Arrow Video" is the label used by the company Arrow Films (actually, specifically, now TheHut.com), which is, at the same time, usually interpreted as a "series"/"collection" by collectors. However, within these series, releases can be Special Editions, Limited Editions etc.
DVD Profiler however only offers an "edition" field. The rules state its used for special versions AND collections, and even lists The Criterion Collection as an example. But, combining "Arrow Video" with "Limited Edition" is a PITA and everyone has a different preference and rule interpretation, especially as Arrow lists the edition ONLY on the back cover. If you DON'T list Arrow Video in the edition, due to the fact that it does not tell you anything and they DO have LE and SE of the same release, you basically have no choice but to list it in companies. Where it creates the conflict with the real company name, Arrow Films.
Basically, you want to store at least 3 data points, but DVD Profiler only has two fields which more or less fit. Thus, problems and rule conflicts  | Posted: Topic Replies: 3, Topic Views: 262 |  | | Yes, that's exactly what I would do and what is done by the majority of the community in regards to such profiles, at least in the online database. This situation happens all the time with HK martial arts films and I have yet to see a boxset type profile for one of them. | Posted: Topic Replies: 6, Topic Views: 637 | | I don't think the rules / Ken intended there to be different profiles for different cuts of the same film. Otherwise, rules like the following would be unnecessary:
"For branching titles, or those with multiple versions (e.g. Theatrical and Director's Cut) on the same disc, use the longest running time."
If he wanted different profiles for them, there would not have to be a rule to take the longest running time.
About "Alternate Versions", he clearly states: "Do not use for: Different cuts of the same film".
If you are not allowed to create alternate versions of the same disc if it contains two or more cuts of the same film, that means there is no legal way to add separate profiles in this case. It does not make sense to not allow different cut profiles if they are on the same disc, but allow them if they happen to be on two discs. Thus, implicitly, alternate cuts should never get their own profile. | Posted: Topic Replies: 6, Topic Views: 637 | | | I'm genuinely baffled how and why 7 people voted this to be the edition instead of the title... | Posted: Topic Replies: 19, Topic Views: 1830 | | Quoting helengrace:
Quote:
Has anyone felt that DVD Profiler could benefit from more advanced filtering tools? Any tips or workarounds you’re using right now?
You can work around quite a few filtering shortcomings with clever tags. What exactly are you trying to filter. But yes, even with tags, I DO have some weird (x and y but not z) or ABC like queries I want which are not possible at all, but it's quite rare. | Posted: Topic Replies: 2, Topic Views: 657 | |
|
| Invelos Forums->Posts by hydr0x |
Page:
1 Previous Next
|