I think Dvdprofiler users are all interested by movies, and also by their collection of DVDs (or Blu-rays) as an "object".

But for some of them, the DVD collection is "more" important than the movie collection. They generally have collector or special editions, sometimes several editions of the same movie, and for those who have huge collections, they have many DVDs they have not yet watched.

For the others, movies are more important, and except the most recent acquisitions, all their movies have been watched at least once, sometimes several times. The technical quality of the movie is for them much more important than additional features or sophiticated packagings.

I also think the way each one customizes his own database depends on the importance given to DVDs or to movies. For example, overviews which match exactly back cover (with bold and italics) are important for "dvd collectors", and less for "movie collectors" who may prefer customized overviews. "DVD collectors" will be happy with the new DVD distributor field, "movie collectors" will be happy with the new custom headshots feature... Linking of actors is probably more important for "movie collectors" than for "DVD collectors"... (of course, all these are examples just to illustrate the difference that may exist between a "DVD" and a "Movie"collector).

The most easy way to answer is to say that DVD and movies are just the same. I'm quite sure that for each of us, one is a little more important than the other (as a collection)... So, think some additional seconds before choosing third solution in the poll...

Oh, good lord.

Skip          

Seeing as how I don't even enter non-feature length non-drama DVDs to my profile database, I'd say I'm definitely more of a movie collector than a DVD collector.

I would like to say that I only add movies, period, but there's the odd mini-series that's been released as one long movie (e.g. The Stand) that I've added the the database, as I think of them more as movies than TV series.

But straight up TV seasons? Nope. The same goes for collection of shorts, bonus discs, dcumentaries, etc.

Basically, I treat my DVD database as my fiction movie database.

KM

Video and audio are quite important to me, packaging is not very important (but not totally unimportant either). Personally I don't care for the new formatting options in the overview, it's just more work for very little gain. For actor and crew information I'm actually much more likely to use IMDb than DVD/slash/Movie Profiler and that is not going to change by adding more data fields. For the same reason I'm not using the headshot feature in Profiler because I can find those readily elsewhere. But it's nice that they are there for those who want them. But there are more important things that need to be fixed imho.

Like Patsa I'm indifferent to the overview changes - all I care about is being able to search / read the text instead of having to read off the back of the case. (and I don't see any value in the obsessive desire to record miss spellings)

Crew - with only a few exceptions I don't care about.

Cast - yes - the main ones - and I don't care if uncredited are included or not. Headshots - big plus from me - helps me to recognise the actor.

Studio - care about whether it's a good one like criterion..

Sound options - I'm English so I like to know what English audio there is - the desire to re-order these as they are laid down on the dvd is frankly puzzling. Who would ever care?
Video - you mean someone would buy a non widescreen dvd? wtf

Genre's - my own selection thank you very much.

Quoting kdh1949:

Quote:

While I pretty much agree with everything you say, Paul, I would argue that the desire to re-order things or to include obvious spelling errors is an attempt to stem the flow of ping-ponging contributions.

Spelling: Some misspellings are not as clear cut as others.  If the word is "thier" it is reasonable to assume it is a typo and should be "their."  But if the word is "colour" and not "color,"  is it misspelled or not? 
That ones easy - it's colour of course
If we have to use the verbatim spelling from the box cover, there's no need to "correct" anything.


Crew Order: Left up to personal preference and not required to follow the exact order laid down on the DVD, users are tempted to contribute changes that suit those preferences.  If one is required to show people exactly in the order as they appear in the credits, the only valid reason to contribute something different is if the order shown is incorrect.

To me, it's just a matter of trying to limit the number of unnecessary contributions that I might have to read and vote upon.  Show things exactly as they appear on screen and you only have to deal with them once.  If you only have a few number of DVDs in your collection it probably doesn't matter.  But the larger your collection, the more things you have to look at, assess, and update.  Everything takes time better spent actually watching the program on the DVD than looking at the box and disc.

I agree completely with you that trying to limit unnecessary changes and ping ponging of contributions is the most important thing.  But if changes which just changed the order were prevented by the program then that would be even better. For instance the order of subtitles is set by the program - couldn't this be done for the Audio as well?

I knew IT!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

Skip

Quoting pauls42:

Quote:
I agree completely with you that trying to limit unnecessary changes and ping ponging of contributions is the most important thing.  But if changes which just changed the order were prevented by the program then that would be even better. For instance the order of subtitles is set by the program - couldn't this be done for the Audio as well?

You won't get any disagreement from me on this. I've been in favor of this idea for some time myself.  I have never understood why there is a specific order for the crew sections (director, writer, producer, ..., art) but within those sections we are left to our own devices to put the role in the order "as credited" as if that had some meaning to anyone.  If I were king (which of course I am not), I would have Profiler display the roles in the same order that they're listed in the pulldown.  For ALL roles, not just Sound, BTW.  All we really need to know is that the film had a Sound Editor, Sound Re-Recording Mixer, Production Sound Mixer.  We really don't need to know the order they were displayed in the film credits.

Same idea for producers and writers.  Why is it crucial to have the EXPs appear before (after) the producers just because that's the way the film credits show them.  Some films show producers above writers, but Profiler doesn't show them that way.