IMDb Name Page Redesign

@PR_Man​  Thanks for the example and the screen-grab. The episodes are split by season so you are viewing his first episode in his first season, which is season 4 (as highlighted in yellow in the pop-up); in this case to see the other episode, you would click the “5” in the season menu.  

We have a suggestion elsewhere in this Sprinklr thread which we are reviewing and that is to add an “All” season view for cases where the person only worked on a small number of episodes across two or more seasons (as is the case with your example).

Hope this helps. 

@Col_Needham​ 

You are right!

Thanks for the explanation.

Pat

@ds0​ Thanks for the feedback, but all of the sorting features are still available on the new name pages.  We have actually added additional options on the new pages.  Please see the "All topics" menu in the upper right of the name page (screen-shots included in an earlier post at https://community-imdb.sprinklr.com/conversations/imdbcom/imdb-name-page-redesign/6351563ae7100d725d54c0bb?commentId=6358cfc5ef90664918a5bd64&replyId=6358e79b232e4267b00341c6)

Hope this helps. 

@Col_Needham​ Exactly what I wanted. Thanks your time.

@Thunderwing13​ 

Can anyone recommend a similar site to this one

Yes, the site you are seeking is IMDb.com

Have you looked at the options in the "All topics" menu at the top right of every name page (the same as the "All topics" menu in the same place on title pages)? To access this menu, click the link highlighted in red:

Also, have you looked at the sort / filter options in the "filter" menu (highted in red), it sounds like "Text view of credits" would suit your needs (highlighted in yellow):

Instead of spending time learning a new UI on a different website, we recommend you could use the same time to explore the significantly more powerful views and options available on the new IMDb name pages instead. 

Hope this helps. 

@Col_Needham​  - yup.  And it has to be done every single time for every single click, just to be able to use the site.  Not really a selling point when you already have 7 pages worth of people complaining about how terrible this redesign is, and how everything single feature they liked is either gone or buried within layers of options that does not persist beyond a single page view.  

@nardog​ Your observation is correct for now, sorry.  The preferences are still largely on the old technology; we have been able to bridge the localisation preference between the two technologies, but not the in-page ones.  We will check with the team on whether this can at least be made sticky instead, such that if you select it on one page, the selection carries forward to other name pages viewed by the same browser.  It is (temporarily) easier to do this vs. a centrally stored preference.  

@eladzmr​ Please see the "All topics" menu in the upper right of the name page (screen-shots included in an earlier post at https://community-imdb.sprinklr.com/conversations/imdbcom/imdb-name-page-redesign/6351563ae7100d725d54c0bb?commentId=6358cfc5ef90664918a5bd64&replyId=6358e79b232e4267b00341c6).  The "All topics" menu is standard on the redesigned title pages too. 

You can also filter filmographies by type via the filter menu underneath the "Credits" heading, click the symbol highlighted in red and see the options highlighted in yellow:

Hi, James Johnston. You've made a great observation and a spectacular point, but the problem in mind is not going to be fixed any time soon at all, Just about the same problem exists on all "modernized" websites, except for the ones where developers made it a point to code the JavaScript in such a way as to remember every little change of state made to an instance of a web page in the "forward" and "back" of a given browser tab's navigation history. This is partially Google's fault, for popularizing such an asinine approach to website navigation.

@james_johnston_4d5h8woi6a7ga​ 

My mouse has a wheel, and clicking on that wheel (middle-click) opens the link in a new tab automatically, both in Edge and Chrome. If you don't have a middle button, it might be that a shift- or control-click of some sort would do the same.

I agree with Jeorj that this is a prevalent design choice (beyond IMDb), so I have trained myself to almost always open links that way. 

@DetroitShadows​ 

You can open an actor's full credits in a new page. I suggest trying the menu or reading the help page.

@mark_moore_b1ciwswferya​ 

You can use the big striped down-arrow icon (the filter options) on the left to find the option separate by type.

For more about the new design, see

https://help.imdb.com/article/issues/GMWASETVPLJYXEZE?ref_=nm_launch_learn

@blbadger​ 

I am hoping somebody creates a Chrome extension that will automatically convert the new bloated IMDb name pages to the basic info that most of us actually want to see, similar to "reference view" for IMDb title pages.

I have no idea if it's possible to do this, but I would love it if so. I spend a lot less time overall on name pages than on title pages, so this change doesn't completely destroy my use of IMDb. But every time I do visit a name page lately, it is a painful experience for all the reasons mentioned by others in this thread.

The trick is to implement something that doesn't slow down the visitor's experience with the website or otherwise eat up too much network/computing resources. The stuff that I've created (monkey scripts) has only been designed to modify document object model (DOM) elements, not download and parse the raw HTML data of an entire web page.

@bderoes​ Ah! I did do that but didn't click on "Project Type". Yes this works - thank you! Would be great if there was an option to separate documentaries too.

@mark_moore_b1ciwswferya​ 

Yes this works - thank you! Would be great if there was an option to separate documentaries too.

There is -- in the screengrab below clicking the checkbox highlighted in red will exclude documentaries and clicking the genre filter highlighted in yellow will show only documentaries.

Hope this helps. 

@Col_Needham​ Thanks! This is all starting to make sense now 😀

@keyword_expert​ 

I am hoping somebody creates a Chrome extension

There's already at least one, and it is easy to find given it is mentioned elsewhere in this announcement thread.

@Col_Needham​ Thank you. I will likely check that out, especially if I do have the need to visit name pages more often in the future.

@Col_Needham​ 

Well, it is not exactly easy to find, and when I did find it (or to be exact, re-find it, since I had read that part before), I tried out the script and it does not work. So I repeat my request that somebody creates an actual Chrome extension (not just a script that requires special skills to even install). 

@keyword_expert​ I've written some chrome plug-ins, but for scraping not for page modification.  I think much of the formatting could be modified while loading the page, but all the data isn't there.  For example, I miss the old Credits format where a few credits of a TV show were shown without needing a click, and if you want all there's a button for that to extend only that one show, not the entire list.  Sure, I get a new window with the new page for episode credits, but then I need more clicks for each season.  That's a lot of clicking, and most likely each is a request for more data from a server.  That means to simulate the old format with a chrome script would need a lot of clicking under the covers, and take too long.  Maybe someone smarter than me can come up with something though, especially if IMDB takes the next obvious step and converts the entire site.

@mark_moore_b1ciwswferya​ OK - it is there. I just had to click on "Self". An odd way of finding the info. Not sure why this has to be hidden until it's clicked on.

@mark_moore_b1ciwswferya​  Thanks for the feedback.  This is not new behaviour though.  The old pages only opened with the first credit category open as well so if you had credits in categories other than "Self" the old pages required a click to view them too. 

See the post I am about to make below for a good tip on viewing all credits quickly. 

Hope this helps. 

@Col_Needham​ Thanks for getting back. Yes you are absolutely right. I think clicking “Self” at the top is easily missed (a weird selective blindness kicks in on the internet) and most casual users will instinctively scroll down to find additional categories and info. Once you know how, it’s very simple but until then you will just assume there’s no more info to be found.

Still, some more works is needed in regards to making it load faster.

@Col_Needham​ Everything that annoyed me about the new revamp (mainly putting films, documentaries, TV, etc all together) is actually easily fixed with a few clicks (although I did need some help finding out how - many thanks). 

Well, I've no reason to doubt the ratio, Dreamian. I mean, just looking at this thread (or previous ones like it), the number of complaints is low compared to the number of people who regularly (or semi-regularly) visit the site. The mass majority probably don't even use the features that have been either eliminated altogether or obscured in some way. Anyway, I've never heard of websites losing popularity on account of the being, so to speak, dumbed down, not to mention that popularity can be inflated by website maintainers with the clever actions of somehow drawing more newcomers to the corresponding website, often as simple as targeting mobile device operators.

@jeorj_euler​ 

The mass majority probably don't even use the features that have been either eliminated altogether

Please can provide details of the features which you think have been eliminated.  Our aim here was not to eliminate any features, and only to add new ones.  We believe we have achieved both of these aims, but it is possible we missed some obscure use case. 

@jeorj_euler​ 😀

 the number of people who regularly (or semi-regularly) visit the site.

- - -

? ?

159,390,000 

plmoon
IMDb member since Wed Nov 30 2022
New user!
https://www.imdb.com/user/ur159390000/

and Many that do not register!!

.

@Dreamian​ 

Come on now

Please can you explain your comment and we will do our best to respond. 

@ACT_1​ 

and Many that do not register!!

Correct, registered customers make-up only a fraction of our userbase. IMDb has over 200 million unique visitors per month (and that's visitors not visits, the latter being significantly higher).  

Col, I'm referring to all the software platform migrations that have taken place since year 2017. Now, even in the context of IMDb name pages, we've lost the pre-loaded menu that links to all the subpaths of the base path of a name page. Instead we're being provided with the often very slow, often resource-intensive "all topics" feature. I don't understand how more folks cannot see how inferior the new approach is.

@Col_Needham​ Assuming that people who didn't complain were 100% happy is not logical...

That said, the "All Credits" tip is one of my main complaints, so that helps.  But had I not found out about it in this thread, I doubt I'd have stumbled on that on my own.  Why buried?

And any word on giving us the option to make our default not giant pictures that take up 60% of my screen?

@ERT​ 

Assuming that people who didn't complain were 100% happy is not logical...

Our point above is not saying this, sorry; it is intended as a rebuttal to people claiming that because almost every comment here is negative, all 200 million+ IMDb customers must not like the change either.  It was also an explanation of how feedback on redesigns generally works, not just on IMDb, but everywhere.

Both absolutely, and especially percentage-wise, there are significantly fewer complaints about the new name pages than there were when the previous name pages launched in 2010 — like all change, it requires time to adjust.  We have the added advantage that we also have a full suite of internal metrics on how the pages are performing and how people are actually using them.  

That said, the "All Credits" tip is one of my main complaints, so that helps.  But had I not found out about it in this thread, I doubt I'd have stumbled on that on my own.  Why buried?

We are glad you appreciate the “All credits” view. The “All topics” menu is becoming a standard navigational tool on IMDb which is rolling out to more and more IMDb pages and it will soon be on the name & title subpages too.  It launched in the summer of 2020 on the redesigned title pages where it has been successful. It seems that many of the people complaining here are using the old title reference view which is specifically aimed at data contributors who are updating information on titles working directly from on-screen credits.  Title reference view is not intended to be a way of avoiding change, so the new name pages will appear to be more jarring for people using title reference view for other reasons, when in fact the new name pages bring more of site into the same modern design. It is also not practical to put all of the links on the menu directly on the page — such placements do not test well with most customers. Different customers have different needs, so what might be a vital missing link for some customers is a distraction for others, hence it is better to use menus. 

Similarly, the triangular filter arrow under the “Credits” label is standard navigation these days on the web and within mobile apps, well beyond just IMDb.  It also provides a link to the “All credits” view as well as other powerful tools. 

IMDb is an entertainment service covering audio-visual media and our customer research shows that generally people want more visual content on our pages, not less.  However, once it becomes easier for us to offer customisations across the whole site when it is entirely on the new technology,  we are not ruling out offering more options.   The problem with options though is they can complicate design and testing beyond the usage and value they bring to customers, so it is always a trade-off.  We can therefore make no promises at this stage. 

Hope this helps. 

The "all topics" feature's reliance upon AJAX/fetch requests could be easily eliminated, and the outcome would be a massive improvement. The way it currently works is simply inefficient.

@Col_Needham​ 

It does, and thanks for your response.  Personally, I'm not trying to troll- just trying to find out how IMDB can be as useful to me as it used to be.

And I do understand the trade-off you describe with options.  However, an option that makes a user's initial experience MUCH more palatable (again, my experience is not everyone's, but my gateway into IMDB is not the front page, but googling a certain movie or actor and showing up on that page.  I dare you- google Clint Howard, click on IMDB's link, and see if you don't do a physical double-take.  It's so jarring (with apologies to Clint Howard).  Personally, I experience this physical reaction every time, even though by now I should be expecting it.

Thx again for your response.

To paraphrase President Kennedy: Ask not what IMDb can do for you — ask what you can do for IMDb.

@Col_Needham​ I do like the "All Credits", however I have a suggestion:

The Intention of this would be to have these above mentioned elements with the credits in a printable version, the photos and thumbnails would need to be decompressed, as in the previous version.

@bounce_out​ No sorry, the “All credits” view meets a very specific customer need and adding back everything which was removed to meet that need will not be practical.  However, there is a browser script which is not supported by IMDb but which may help and is mentioned elsewhere in this thread. 

Col, it's called name reference view, not "all credits" view. Haha.

@jeorj_euler​  :-)

@Col_Needham​ I guess I'm confused on the customer need, I mean I scroll through here and I just see negative after negative, how is it so hard to have other viewable options? I like "2003 called", yes, that was around the time when users where able to change their viewing versions. My team is needing all of the info pieces shown, just need a printable version. The browser script that was tagged leaves out at least User Lists. As previously stated, at $.10 a page, the previous version had a 5 page printing spread, which was $.50, now that printing spread gets tripled to $1.50 which isn't very practical...seems like inflation causes IMDb photos/thumbnails to expand, ugh.

Simply requesting for both the previous and current version to be viewable, where users can decide how to view, like back in the day.

@Col_Needham​  Well, it's going around the houses to get back to the front door, but thanks for the tip. It does help.