 |
|
|
|
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 2 3  Previous Next
|
|
Studio Canal, StudioCanal or Studiocanal? |
|
|
|
|
|
| Author |
Message |
| Registered: May 11, 2007 |  Posts: 249 |
| | Posted: | | | | Quoting TheMadMartian: Quote:
Quoting Lewis_Prothero:
Quote:
Even though this answers the question correctly, I think apltm's problem is that the mentioned studio has (and had) different variants in it's writing.
If I understood him correctly his concern is the correct linking between this variants by standardizing the entry in DVDProfiler.
I am not aware of a rule that allows us to 'standardize' studio names. We do, as with all things, convert to mixed case, but I don't see a rule that allows us to change what is credited. Given this statement from Ken: http://www.invelos.com/Forums.aspx?task=viewtopic&topicID=441509&PageNum=2&messageID=1212269#M1212269, we already do to some extent. |
| | Registered: March 13, 2007 |  Posts: 21,610 |
| | Posted: | | | | Exactly as credited canal has used all there variants in it's history | | | ASSUME NOTHING!!!!!!
CBE, MBE, MoA and proud of it.
Outta here
Billy Video |
| | Registered: March 19, 2007 | Reputation:  | | Posts: 6,018 |
| | Posted: | | | | The rules also say "There is further information about correct listings of studios and media companies" - which implies the rules themselves do not contain the last word on what's correct and what isn't. |
| | Registered: March 13, 2007 | | Reputation: | | Posts: 13,201 |
| | Posted: | | | | Quoting dee1959jay: Quote:
Then kindly explain why there is an Invelos autofilter in place to change 20th to Twentieth Century Fox. Because Ken decided that in three cases, he wanted a specific listing. When he announced that there would be a filter for those studios he said, and I quote, "We do this not to standardize on particular studio names, but to correct some common errors. The studios do enough fragmenting due to name changes without our help." Note he specifically stated that he wasn't doing this to standardize. That tells me that we don't standardize film credits. Quote:
The rules also say "There is further information about correct listings of studios and media companies" - which implies the rules themselves do not contain the last word on what's correct and what isn't. Yes, they say correct listings, not standardized listings. In my opinion, there is a difference. | | | 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 | | Posts: 21,610 |
| | Posted: | | | | There used to be a listing of correct studio names, that I'd what was referred to. The martian I'd correct on all counts. Like I said before list exactly as credited, no ifs no ands and no buts. | | | ASSUME NOTHING!!!!!!
CBE, MBE, MoA and proud of it.
Outta here
Billy Video |
| | Registered: May 29, 2007 | | Reputation: | | Posts: 3,475 |
| | | Registered: March 13, 2007 | | Posts: 21,610 |
| | Posted: | | | | I have never disagreed Kathy, but I have said that I suspect such a thing is a low priority and likely still is. We shall see soon enough | | | ASSUME NOTHING!!!!!!
CBE, MBE, MoA and proud of it.
Outta here
Billy Video |
| | Registered: March 19, 2007 | | Reputation: | | Posts: 6,018 |
| | Posted: | | | | Quoting TheMadMartian: Quote:
Quoting dee1959jay:
Quote:
Then kindly explain why there is an Invelos autofilter in place to change 20th to Twentieth Century Fox.
Because Ken decided that in three cases, he wanted a specific listing. When he announced that there would be a filter for those studios he said, and I quote, "We do this not to standardize on particular studio names, but to correct some common errors. The studios do enough fragmenting due to name changes without our help."
Note he specifically stated that he wasn't doing this to standardize. That tells me that we don't standardize film credits.
Quote:
The rules also say "There is further information about correct listings of studios and media companies" - which implies the rules themselves do not contain the last word on what's correct and what isn't.
Yes, they say correct listings, not standardized listings. In my opinion, there is a difference. Please don't put words in my mouth I have never used. I have never advocated standardizing Studio names. All I have said is that studios should not always be entered "as credited". | | | | Last edited: by dee1959jay |
| | Registered: March 13, 2007 | | Posts: 21,610 |
| | Posted: | | | | No, deejay, they are entered as credited always. The line exception being tcfhe. | | | ASSUME NOTHING!!!!!!
CBE, MBE, MoA and proud of it.
Outta here
Billy Video |
|   | T!M | | Profiling since Dec. 2000 |
| Registered: March 13, 2007 | | Reputation: | | Posts: 8,733 |
| | | Registered: March 19, 2007 | | Reputation: | | Posts: 6,018 |
| | Posted: | | | | Quoting Winston Smith: Quote:
No, deejay, they are entered as credited always. The line exception being tcfhe. No, not always - as has been mentioned repeatedly in this thread, there are Invelos autocorrections in certain cases. Moreover, the rules tell us e.g. to enter Universal Pictures, even if only "Universal" is credited, to leave out both company and locality-specific suffixes, even if that's how they are credited, etc. Which leaves us with a mixed bag of "credited as" and not (exactly) "credited as". Besides, there is this rule: "Some companies (using similar but different names) may serve more than one function. List such companies only once, using the name from the logo. List secondary publishers even if the name is similar. If you are unsure of the function performed, do not list the company." I've seen cases where different names are used for the same studio at different places in the credits of one and the same movie. If you ask me, the whole area of Studios could use an overhaul rule-wise. Rules such as the one I quoted are not the most transparent, especially for less experiences users. As you mentioned yourself earlier in this thread, there used to be a thread listing "correct" studio names (the exceptions I mentioned could in a way be regarded as remnants of that). Since that was abandoned (and even before, but it has become more prevalent since), I've encountered many varieties of the same studio name, where some users contribute names from logos (as the rule above tells us), others contribute full names as credited elsewhere in the movie credits etc. etc., resulting in a highly inconsistent way of handling studio names overall. | | | | Last edited: by dee1959jay |
| | Registered: May 29, 2007 | | Reputation: | | Posts: 3,475 |
| | Posted: | | | | Quoting dee1959jay: Quote:
If you ask me, the whole area of Studios could use an overhaul rule-wise. Rules such as the one I quoted are not the most transparent, especially for less experiences users. As you mentioned yourself earlier in this thread, there used to be a thread listing "correct" studio names (the exceptions I mentioned could in a way be regarded as remnants of that). Since that was abandoned (and even before, but it has become worse), I've encountered many varieties of the same studio name, where some users contribute names from logos (as the rule above tells us), others contribute full names as credited elsewhere in the movie credits etc. etc., resulting in a highly inconsistent way of handling studio names overall. I've run into issues with studios also. For example MGM might be abbreviated or be spelled out completely on the same DVD. Which should be used? Is one more correct than the other? And, who decides since they are both allowed Ken. Since invelos has "correct listings" for a few specific studios, it might be a good idea to looking into updating this data for other studios also. |
| | Registered: March 13, 2007 | | Posts: 21,610 |
| | Posted: | | | | The premise behind the rule was simple as credited. The reason is the name of the studio tells the history of the studio. As I mentioned studio canal has used all there variants in it's history. Universal has used several variations, even Disney has used different variants and you can track the company through them., as to differences between sections of film, yes this does occur and that probably should be looked at, but the premise was and remains as credited. | | | ASSUME NOTHING!!!!!!
CBE, MBE, MoA and proud of it.
Outta here
Billy Video |
| | Registered: March 19, 2007 | | Reputation: | | Posts: 6,018 |
| | Posted: | | | | No argument there, Skip. Historical name variants should be preserved - I fully agree.
Thing is: the rule modifications since the time you worked on the original rules in this area have not helped to create a consistent database nor to create transparency for users, to say the least. In my view, a well-written rule should tell us WHAT to enter (either strictly Credited As, but then without any exceptions or autofilters, or names from a list like the thread we used to have), WHERE to get the info (therefore NOT saying "There is further information" without telling us where to find that information) and, in cases where the credits contain conflicting data, WHICH data take precedence. | | | | Last edited: by dee1959jay |
| | Registered: May 29, 2007 | | Reputation: | | Posts: 3,475 |
| | Posted: | | | | Since history can't change, maybe there should be a pinned thread that lists the timeline of the studios.
This way we can look at the production year and know where to look to see exactly which studio to list and how it should be spelled. | | | | Last edited: by Kathy |
| | Registered: March 13, 2007 | | Posts: 21,610 |
| | Posted: | | | | The difference you refer to Kathy, I think has to do with the copyrighted name a studio might use. To sort it out might take a level of expertise possessed by few users, including myself. Off hand, I can think of only one user that seems to have a good grasp of all things studio and that I trust his knowledge. I know about studios but no where near his level. To be honest, to me some users seem less concerned about studio knowledge and more about some personal agenda. Why do I say that, because I can remember a time when people would actually list Turner Entertainment a studio for films like The Wizard of Oz which is utter nonsense, they own the film and that is all. Oz was filmed long before TE ever existed. | | | ASSUME NOTHING!!!!!!
CBE, MBE, MoA and proud of it.
Outta here
Billy Video | | | | Last edited: by Winston Smith |
|
|
|
Invelos Forums->DVD Profiler: Contribution Discussion |
Page:
1 2 3 Previous Next
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
 |