200+ images removed from I'm from Arkansas (1944)

@Jayseph​ 

Any update?

@jay_spirit​ Hi-

Apologies for the delayed reply and an updated information on this issue. We are working through a backlog of threads.

I have checked the status on the ticket and it's being worked on. We'll update this thread once we receive further information.

Thank you for your patience.

Cheers! 

@jackry​ 

I added the images to FRENZY.

Unlike the pictures in TRUE BLUE (2001), all the images from FRENZY were distinct from one another.

I spent a lot of time tagging the actors, many of whom are in tiny roles and may be hard to identify from the cast list alone.

I also added shots of the opening and closing credits, which helps verify the information on IMDb. These shots are useful for determining the importance of each credit. IMDb is unable to show the size, font and position of credits from the text data alone.

As a user, I'm often looking for a very specific image from a movie and am frustrated when I can't find it on IMDb or a Google images search. I thought having an exhaustive collection of images from a movie—again, all distinct from one another—in the sequence they appear in the movie, would be useful.

I also thought adding and tagging images of even the most obscure actors in a movie would be useful.

The submission guide forbids "unnecessary quantities of very similar still images from the same scene." In my opinion, the images I submitted were all distinct.

I did not use a bot to make these screenshots. I spent several hours making them from a high-quality video. Then I spent several more hours tagging all the actors.

I respectfully and humbly ask @Michelle to add the images back to the database. The submission guide forbids "unnecessary quantities of very similar images," but there's nothing about having too many images of any kind.

If she disagrees with me that the images are distinct enough, I can selectively remove any specific number she chooses. If she disagrees that it is useful to include screenshots of the credits, I can flag those for removal as well.

I appreciate the work you're doing in cleaning up the database; but I think in certain cases, you may be destroying the hard work of contributors to no real end except to make the database slightly less exhaustive than it is and was meant to be.

@jackry​ "Love Actually" gallery looks really bad. Not only is it cluttered with "unnecessary quantities of very similar still images", those poor quality "unnecessary quantities of very similar still images" are also repeated a few times as exact duplicates.

It’s essentially a flip book if you run them fast.

@jackry​ Not at all!

Maybe I overdo it, and the staff will agree with you. Who knows?

I agree that REAR WINDOW, NORTH BY NORTHWEST, PSYCHO and THE BIRDS are more worthy of that treatment than FRENZY; but YouTube happened to have a high-quality upload, so I decided to work on it.

Besides, the stuff I screencap is usually much more obscure than that. I'M FROM ARKANSAS is a good example. Cheap B-movie comedy from the 1940s. No one's heard of it. But I figure it should have as much information—in the form on images—as any other film.

We'll see. I keep hoping they'll reorganize the images section, and maybe use AI to sort the pictures in some kind of order, while removing the ones that are duplicates. I can see why others might find 100+ images to be a mess. But I always go to the actor I'm looking for and click on it. That narrows it down to what I want.

@Tonio_Fraga​ Hi! Given the year the title was on it's difficult to find better quality images, feel completely free to upload better quality images and we can definitely delete the others. 

Thanks!