What is the opinion of users submitting only films? I can see now where certain users will want to start tackling an entire actor's career to get the whole thing documented. Or perhaps they really want to see a studio get listed.

What they'll be doing is submitting a whole lot of films with little to no releases.

Is this acceptable? It's not something I plan to do as I'm here to catalog actual releases (editions). I can't see where it would be wrong of a user to do so, as long as the data is correct and the future Guidelines are followed.

Here lies another issue I was thinking about, the data from this database whether we like it or not is going to come mostly from imdb. imdb is a very good database and I wouldn't argue at all about the validity of any of the data but the top level of this database is almost an exercise in cut and paste from imdb. are there any legal ramifications of this? are there options to just get API access to the data without having to enter it all?

In the end this database is for cataloguing our releases as Adambassador says, but we will still be replicating a large percent of imdb.

I can tell you this. IMDB is actually a pretty decent database, I agree, but no one will catalog releases as well as our community here. In spite of incorrect data at Discogs, it's still the one database with the most integrity and I predict the same here.

IMO one should have to sub a release to sub the film...

And eventually, I would like to see the site automatically enter the film when a release is subbed that is not attached to a film.

IMO one should have to sub a release to sub the film...

That is a really good idea. And, just like at Discogs, they must have that release in their possession at the time of submitting.

That should go without saying - and it's even more important in films IMO because the differences are so much more subtle (distributors and regions for example)

Yeh my feelings are you should have the release before submitting the film / release pair. That way we know that the data relates to a real thing.

Here lies another issue I was thinking about, the data from this database whether we like it or not is going to come mostly from imdb. imdb is a very good database and I wouldn't argue at all about the validity of any of the data but the top level of this database is almost an exercise in cut and paste from imdb. are there any legal ramifications of this?

From the film data point of view, yes IMDb is a great resource already for that information. For example, their extensive credits. But they have no information on the releases themselves, which I think is what is important to people like us who like the way Discogs works.

That doesn't mean we can't have just as good, or even better, film data. The ability to enter it is there.

Regarding sources of information, I feel it should come from the release itself for accuracy. IMDb does not allow it's data to be used, we shouldn't be doing that:

(quote from IMDb) "The data can only be used for personal and non-commercial use and must not be altered/republished/resold/repurposed to create any kind of online/offline database of movie information (except for individual personal use)."

OK, sounds good. AOR is the best way to go. This does mean that we'll have to take credits from the end of the movie because they're not all listed on the packaging. So, just main actors, producers, directors will get entered by the majority of the users.

AOR is the best way to go.

Agreed. That way we'll also avoid duplicating errors from IMDb or other databases.

This does mean that we'll have to take credits from the end of the movie because they're not all listed on the packaging. So, just main actors, producers, directors will get entered by the majority of the users.

And I think this is ok.

"This does mean that we'll have to take credits from the end of the movie because they're not all listed on the packaging. So, just main actors, producers, directors will get entered by the majority of the users."

As I said on another thread as well - we have imdb for that - I would limit roles to the billing on the releases. I don't think we need to list every single role within a film - we should stick to what is credited on the packaging, IMO, like we do on Discogs...

As I said on another thread as well - we have imdb for that

And, as nik said above, IMDb does not allow copying of their data. So, we should be very careful in how we proceed.

I agree with Adambassador that discogs users will create some remarkably accurate release data, I never meant to infer otherwise. However cutting and pasting from imdb is going to be a lot easier than watching credits and entering data from their.

Individual release data can come from the physical product or the film but the top level 'master release' is where the issues will come into play, since different releases will have different credits sometimes, for example the 3 hour cut of Dune has had David Lynch's name removed from it at his request.

I would limit roles to the billing on the releases. I don't think we need to list every single role within a film - we should stick to what is credited on the packaging, IMO, like we do on Discogs...

But this will result sometimes even leaving some of the cast out. For example: http://www.filmo.gs/film/334-Corpse-Bride - the packaging only names Depp, Bonham Carter and Watson, leaving out quite notable names: http://www.imdb.com/title/tt0121164/

I think users should be able to enter as many credits as they want to, whether they are from the packaging or from the end credits.

I think users should be able to enter as many credits as they want to, whether they are from the packaging or from the end credits.

Yes, I totally agree. And I think that credits should be optional. I have only been adding the very top level credits - mostly starring actors and producers and directors.

cutting and pasting from imdb is going to be a lot easier than watching credits and entering data from their.

Right, but we can't do that due to their licensing.

As I said on another thread as well - we have imdb for that

And, as nik said above, IMDb does not allow copying of their data. So, we should be very careful in how we proceed.

I think Kergillian meant that is we are interested in that data, we can look it up on IMDb, rather than enter it all here.

There is a field on the film data called "external_references" http://www.filmo.gs/wiki/Film-Data that we can put links to external sites in. These links will be live eventually. I put in links to IMDb and also to themoviedb.org, but they can be to any such reference. It should be very easy to nip across to another site if needed.

"And, as nik said above, IMDb does not allow copying of their data. So, we should be very careful in how we proceed."

You misunderstand - as nik pointed out, what I mean is that imdb exists to give all credits to everything film so we don't need to replicate that function ;)

So let's focus on what is written on the packaging and not worry about the inner workings of the film.

"But this will result sometimes even leaving some of the cast out. For example: http://www.filmo.gs/film/334-Corpse-Bride - the packaging only names Depp, Bonham Carter and Watson, leaving out quite notable names: http://www.imdb.com/title/tt0121164/"

If the studio/companies wanted those people credited then they would be credited - as with Discogs we should not question these decisions but follow them.

"I think users should be able to enter as many credits as they want to, whether they are from the packaging or from the end credits."

The problem is that:

1) It makes it very hard to check and verify/confirm this information - in fact, we'd end up having to go to another source like imdb or sit down and watch the credits ourselves in order to ensure the info is correct

2) It leaves it open to people to just copy/paste from a source like imdb which opens up legal ramifications.

If we limit it to what's on the physical release (ie: written on the packaging), and perhaps add an 'uncredited' credit here and there for exceptions (when the top billed cast aren't even listed, when there are a few notable people missing, or when people like David Lynch have their names removed (as noted above), then I think we'll be solid.

As nik pointed out, we have the links to other sites if people feel the utter urge to go see who the extras are. But I don't see why we should go to extremes to replicate data that already exists.

For me, Filmogs is a chance to catalogue data that DOESN'T exist - different versions of the releases - and keep tabs on one's personal collection.

I understand your concern Kergillian, but these credits do appear on the film, and people should be able to enter them if they want to. Any difficulty with checking them shouldn't stop that. And yes we need to be vigilant that the data is not just a copypasta.

I agree with mirva here - "I think users should be able to enter as many credits as they want to, whether they are from the packaging or from the end credits".

The two films I added so far (the first two in the -Qatsi trilogy, 3rd coming soon) are because I'm at my office and my releases of them are at home, with the logic that it seems like the film has to be in there before I can sub a release anyway - so might as well get going in the moments I have to visit here. If that's bad I can stop and go work on the SACD format changeover at Discogs instead, but until the film database (as opposed to the release database) is beefed up with titles, is it OK if I add some films when I can if I promise to also add releases of them pronto? I don't intend to add films I can't follow up on with releases...

@7jlong -> Yeh I think that is fine, especially at this early stage. There is only a small group of us, and we are here to test things out and make discoveries. Everyone should feel free to 'push' things at this stage, so we can get each others feedback and figure out what we should be doing, and how we should be doing it!

Fair enough, nik - I suppose trying to handicap people who want to be completists would be hypocritical for me, who can be the ultimate completist at times :)

I do think it will open the floodgates to some degree though.

Login or Register to post a reply to this topic.