jay_spirit's profile

958 Messages

 • 

28.7K Points

Friday, June 9th, 2023 1:52 AM

Closed

Solved

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

I'm from Arkansas (1944) (archived page)

I'm from Arkansas (1944) had 207 images, but now it has 7.

958 Messages

 • 

28.7K Points

1 year ago

Frenzy (1972) had 1184 images. Now it has less than 70.

Frenzy (1972) (archived page)

Employee

 • 

129 Messages

 • 

3.8K Points

1 year ago

Hi jay_spirit

Thanks for reporting. I've forwarded this information to the appropriate team for further investigation (Ref Ticket #V927071176) and we will reply here once we know more.

Thank you for your patience

958 Messages

 • 

28.7K Points

@Jayseph​ 

Any update?

Employee

 • 

1.4K Messages

 • 

15.4K Points

@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! 

53 Messages

 • 

958 Points

1 year ago

Just regarding Frenzy:

https://community-imdb.sprinklr.com/conversations/data-issues-policy-discussions/another-polluted-gallery/62ab6481ae73c605a686696e

The movie gallery was cleaned because some brilliant mind decided to take screenshots from the whole movie and sequentially uploaded them.

The same kind of pratice also was repeated here:

https://community-imdb.sprinklr.com/conversations/data-issues-policy-discussions/clean-pierce-brosnans-james-bond-movie-galleries/628ec40a5c183c026e20b49a

And you can LIVE CHECK more of this on the following exemples:

Robocop:

https://www.imdb.com/title/tt0093870/mediaindex/?ref_=tt_mi_sm

The sequels:

https://www.imdb.com/title/tt0100502/mediaindex/?ref_=tt_mi_sm

https://www.imdb.com/title/tt0107978/mediaindex?page=4&ref_=ttmi_mi_sm

Love Actually:

https://www.imdb.com/title/tt0314331/mediaindex/?ref_=tt_mi_sm

And, this B-movie here is a sick particular case:

https://www.imdb.com/title/tt0267989/mediaindex/?ref_=tt_mi_sm

I'm gonna probably remember some more absurds later, but I hope that this answer some of your both questions.

958 Messages

 • 

28.7K Points

@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.

1.7K Messages

 • 

22.9K Points

@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.

53 Messages

 • 

958 Points

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

53 Messages

 • 

958 Points

1 year ago

My apologies to heard about this and if I sound arrogantly on my comment. But I personally think that more than 1000 screenshot from a movie it’s purely overkill.

This is 3 or 4 times the amount of the galleries of movies like Psycho, Rear Window, North by Northwest, Vertigo, Dial M for Murder, Rope and The Birds counting the screenshots they have plus posters, products and making of photos all together - and I keep thinking that they still very polluted either way with only 100 to 300 images. Some of those seem to be captured from a 480p file, are extremely repetitive and make for an messy and bad looking browsing.

Now, Frenzy isn’t a great classic or even a high profile title, obviously that found 1000 sequentially repetitive pics would be an indicative of some kind of practice to get easy contribution points because it’s really too weird and uncommon. Not even movies that might have interesting material enough to produce 1000 screenshots like Ben-Hur and Spartacus have all this of images gathered.

No hard feelings.

958 Messages

 • 

28.7K Points

@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.

Employee

 • 

4.9K Messages

 • 

52.4K Points

5 months ago

Hi @jay_spirit -

Galleries have now been reinstated.

Cheers!

Employee

 • 

4.9K Messages

 • 

52.4K Points

@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!