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->Posts by GSyren Page: 1 2 3 ...12  Previous   Next
Message Details
Quoting rdodolak:
Quote:
Personally, I think the edition field has gotten out of hand and everything and anything on the cover is now being put in as an edition.

Totallly agree!
Posted:
Topic Replies: 11, Topic Views: 235
Quoting scotthm:
Quote:
If you're eyes can't tell the difference it makes no difference.

I suspect that there are a few people here who would disagree with that. 
Posted:
Topic Replies: 20, Topic Views: 407
Quoting mediadogg:
Quote:
Can you legally enforce rights management when you give away your data on a public facing web page?

Well, probably not, but just the thought of going up against Amazon (who owns IMDb) in court would probably deter most people.
Posted:
Topic Replies: 84, Topic Views: 16830
Quoting scotthm:
Quote:
It's easy to distinguish 2.35:1, 1.75:1/1.78:1, and 1.33:1 from one another by eye, and that's the tool I use.

Only if you trust the cover info that these are indeed the exact ratios used. Could you tell if it's actually 2.39:1 rather than 2.35:1?
I don't think I could.
Posted:
Topic Replies: 20, Topic Views: 407
AspectGuide is a simple tool for determining aspect ratio.

As for audio, most media players will report the type of audio track that is playing. If you want a tool that gives an overview of all audio tracks, take a look at mediadogg's DVDPca, which does that and much more.
Posted:
Topic Replies: 20, Topic Views: 407
I'm a bit confused about this part of the rules:
Quote:
If a title is re-released with the same UPC, but different cover images, do not contribute the new images to the original profile.

If the images are "largely different" it's OK to create an alternate version. But what if the images are just slightly different, but the scans in the online profile are from a re-release, is it OK to contribute the original images?

The reason I ask is because "do not contribute new images" is ambigous. Does it mean "do not contribute the newer (re-release) images" meaning that it's OK to contribute the originals, or does it mean "do not contribute any other new images even if they are the original images"?

What's your take?
Posted:
Topic Replies: 3, Topic Views: 147
Just found a minor bug. After clicking Prev you couldn't uncheck Ignore.
Probably not something that most users would find a need to do, but I fixed it anyway in ImageTest 1.4.1.
Posted:
Topic Replies: 16, Topic Views: 850
ImageTest 1.4



OK, this will be the last update today, I promise. Well, unless someone comes up with a really interesting suggestion, maybe.
But I really need to do something about my unwatched pile. 853 movies! 
Posted:
Topic Replies: 16, Topic Views: 850
That makes sense. That goes on my to-do list. Now, if I have some more washing to do … 
Posted:
Topic Replies: 16, Topic Views: 850
I had nothing better to do while my washing machine was chugging away, so I implemented sorting by file size. It is not, in my opinion, as useful as sorting by image width, but it might be interesting anyway.

See the new checkbox "Sort by file size" in Settings.

ImageTest 1.3
Posted:
Topic Replies: 16, Topic Views: 850
For the purpose of this program, sorting by image height is not useful. Let me explain why.

DVD cases have well defined proportions. So if an image is less than full width, it will also be less than full height by the same percentage. So sorting by width or height would, in principle, yield the exact same result. In practice though it might vary slightly because cropping may not be exact. But for all intents and purposes it would be the same.

Then we have Blu-Ray and Ultra HD. Those cases have different proportions. They are shorter. And to complicate matters further, cover images come in two different sizes; standard cases have shorter images than other cases, like digibooks for example, or cases with slipcovers.

So, sorting by height really isn't useful. Sorting by file size might be interesting, though. I'll do some checking and see if it's worth implementing in ImageTest.
Posted:
Topic Replies: 16, Topic Views: 850
Good point, mediadogg.

I have never used Hyper-V myself, but I guess that one could get the same problem in my tools. I try to determine the local IP address to use as the default IP address in the configuration. But I have no idea what would happen if something like Hyper-V was running. It might well confuse my algorithm, too.

But in Marty's case it seems it got the correct IP address.
Posted:
Topic Replies: 28, Topic Views: 2612
Ok, things are moving fast today.

AiAustria found a bug. The program crashed if a back image did not have a corresponding front image (or vice versa if you sort by front image). I never knew that this situation could occur, but now I have taken it into account.

AiAustria also suggested that images should be shown not resized when the program is maximized, so you could see their actual sizes. Well, I didn't want to force that, but I have added a new setting with that effect, for those who want it that way.

So, here we are now with ImageTest 1.2.0
Posted:
Topic Replies: 16, Topic Views: 850
Since a few users have shown interest in ImageTest, I have taken pity on the poor program and I have added some spit and shine, a help file and a download page.



Apart from some cosmetic improvements to the user interface, two new features have been added:
- Bypass ignore list
- Autoselect profile in DVD Profiler (in Settings)

Read all about it in the help file!

ImageTest 1.1
Posted:
Topic Replies: 16, Topic Views: 850
Quoting sofa747@gmail.com:
Quote:
very interesting program.  i am sure i have some older profiles that could make use of this

You have a PM.
Posted:
Topic Replies: 16, Topic Views: 850
Another little tool, in case anyone is interested.

Background
I had noticed that some of the profiles in my collection, especially the older ones, often had inferior cover scans. That was especially true of the back covers for some reason. So I wanted a simple tool to find the covers in most need of updating.

What I did
I wrote a program that examined all images in my collection and sorted then by back cover width. Initially it just had the cover images and a "Next" button. But I found that I wanted to skip some profiles, but when I run the program again, I had to skip them again. And again. So I added a "Ignore" function that wrote the IDs to a file so I could skip them when I ran the program next time. And I added a "Prev" button (that does not check the Ignore file) so I could back up if I accidentally flagged something for Ignore.



I have been using this program for a while, and I have found many covers that needed updating, so I have scanned them and submitted them. I don't know if anyone else is interested in this program. It would probably be someone who had a  a scanner and lot of older profiles. And the time to do something about them.

I have not bothered to write a help file or create a web page for this program. But if anyone is interested in it, send me a PM and I'll return a download link.

BTW, you don't need HTTPJolie to use this program, but if you don't have it, the "Select in Profiler" button will be disabled.
Posted:
Topic Replies: 16, Topic Views: 850
Quoting Wigram:
Quote:
Quoting wazh:
Quote:
My question is how would I find say 883929692606b.jpg to what disc this actually is?

The digits (883929692606 here) is the UPC/EAN; b is the back cover (a is the front). Then, in Profiler, ALT-F10 will lead you to the profile for any UPC in your collection.

Actually, the front is *f.jpg
Posted:
Topic Replies: 4, Topic Views: 323
And here comes an unexpected twist. 

The "new cover" was apparently a photoshop job by a well meaning user who thought the cover should match the actual data. The contribution has has now been withdrawn.

But it's good that we agree, in case something like this actually happens.
Posted:
Topic Replies: 5, Topic Views: 497
This is in regards to Buck Rogers in the 25th Century: Season Two.

When this was first released, here was a misprint on the back cover. The episode Shgoratchx! was placed under Disc 2 instead of under Disc 3, where it actually belongs. A second printing of the cover corrected this mistake.

 

The cover currently in the online is the original with the misprinting. Now a user wants to replace this with the corrected cover. That poses a problem, in my opinion. The current cover scan is a valid scan, as it depicts an actual existing cover. You can't replace a valid cover with another different valid cover. You would have to do so by the way of a alternate profile.

But... an alternate cover must be "largely different". The reason for this is that users must be able to tell which variant matches their own copy when they download from Invelos. These two would look exactly identical, which would just cause confusion.

So, in my opinion, the cover with the correct data - as ironic as it seems - cannot be contributed. Am I right?
Posted:
Topic Replies: 5, Topic Views: 497
Quoting scotthm:
Quote:
If you don't know, don't contribute.

That sounds reasonable, but the problem is that in this case both sides "know".
Posted:
Topic Replies: 36, Topic Views: 1549
Mine too, even the ones submitted today.
Posted:
Topic Replies: 22, Topic Views: 1483
I just profiled the US release of the Vengeance Trails boxset. I'm convinced that the UK release is exactly the same product, except with a different J-cover (to give it a different, locality correct, EAN).

So, if anyone wants to profile the UK release, you can just copy everything from the US release (expect the UPC, of course) when my contribution has been approved. You're welcome! 

I bet that all Arrow releases that are released at the same time in the UK and the US are the same discs. All I have looked at are region AB. And for boxset children w/o UPC/EAN, I bet that the covers are identical, too. It just makes sense.

Edit: The UPC is on the bottom of the J-cover, so it's not on the cover scan, so you can even use the same cover scans for the boxset parent.
Posted:
Topic Replies: 0, Topic Views: 155
CLTInfo 2.4.1

Found a minor bug. For names that contain more than 3 words, CLTInfo would not find the name in "Credited as". So, for example:

If you searched CTLBoss for "Joe C. Blow II" then in CLTInfo

Joe C. Blow II - works fine
Joe C. Blow II [Joe Blow] - works fine
Joe Blow [Joe C. Blow II] - CLTInfo would not find this

Fixed in 2.4.1.
Posted:
Topic Replies: 11, Topic Views: 5220
OK, and is HTTPJolie activated in DVD Profiler, not just installed? I.e. in View Plugins, is the checkbox checked for HTTPJolie?
Posted:
Topic Replies: 83, Topic Views: 6766
Quoting mreeder50:
Quote:
OK, so I'm trying to get OverviewCheckPlus working. HTTPJolie is running in DVDP and every time I launch OverviewCheckPlus, I get the message "No contact with HTTPJolie". I'm at a loss as to where to go next.

Check the settings in OverviewCheckPlus. Is the IP address correct?
Posted:
Topic Replies: 83, Topic Views: 6766
Invelos Forums->Posts by GSyren Page: 1 2 3 ...12  Previous   Next