Quote:
Originally Posted by MoviePropMaster2008
What do you mean? Please clarify.
For the record, before IMFDB was started ... there WAS NO RECORD of much of the information here. Many of the original pages were created by film & gun enthusiasts. There is TONS of information here that you will never find anywhere else, ever. Why? Because this is a specialized field of interest.
Most gun publications couldn't give a rat's ass if a specific movie used a chopped and Converted HK94 instead of an MP5 for example. They're only interested in gun history. Movie trivia sites are only interested in movie history and are notorious for knowing NOTHING about guns.
In fact this site was created to CORRECT much of the erroneous information on the net.
There is a lot of first hand information, or face to face second hand information that is being chronicled here. I and the other armorers on the site put in information 'from the field' per se. In the beginning, I was regularly inputting information that I got first hand from industry vets like Syd Stembridge and Mike Papac. We now have first hand information from guys like Al Vrkljan and Steve Karnes that is found nowhere else! I also documented 'on the set' information from guys like Larry Merrril and Harry Lu (though as we've discovered, sometimes even experienced armorers 'remember it wrong'.  eh MT2008? ) But IMFDB has grown ALOT from a year ago. So I am not sure where other publications can give attribution, nor would I trust them to know what the hell they're talking about anyway. Ignorance about weapons in films abounds (I still have to explain to 99.99% of the public that we use REAL GUNS in movies). You're NOT going to get accurate information from other sources unless they're from the armorers (or MG brokers like Dan Shea) or other people associated with the industry. |
Hi brother, first of all I do agree with you that it does have tons of information and this is a specialized field of interest. But when ever any one will ask you about authenticity of any article, you will need to say that " when we started ... there was no record ... blah blah blah ... so we have experienced armorers ... and blah blah blah". Hang on a second, I dont know any of those experienced armorers. With all due respect, they may have expertise on firearms and they may have first hand information. However, did they take any responsibility that 90% of the information of IMFDB is CORRECT which in turn, aims to CORRECT much of the erroneous information on the net. Who takes the responsibility that what IMFDB says is even 90% true. Reference does not always mean "wikipedia style reference". Articles can be cited in a different way also.
As far as I know that, every gun has some sort of morphological peculiarity (otherwise they could have trapped in copyright issue). When some one identifies the gun by looking at the screenshot he basically looks for those identification marks/characters in the gun. He finaly compares the gun in the screenshot with the possible original image of the gun in his mind and then comes into conclusion. But he only writes about the conclusion, and hardly tries to establish the fact with enough reason. What if he writes about the identification marks one by one and also writes about the comparisn which he made, along with the reference that the real gun does have these external features. This reference can be of the manufacturer or any other authentic website. And if no other websites have any clue about the identification marks then please ask any of the experienced armorers to publish their own blogs and write about it. Those blogs can be used as reference. For the chopped and Converted guns, I think more reason (both for and against) to identify the gun, is required.
Finally, if you realy want IMFDB to be appreciated internationally, then there has to be absolute transparency in the articles. Most of the people in this world live outside the US, and most of them dont know those experienced armorers. Either you have to keep in touch with experts from every film industry around the globe who can take responsibility of the articles based on films made in their native film industries , or make the articles systematic so that they can be self contained with enough reason to establish the facts. Add transparency and concrete reason, so that in future if any scholarly articles publised in this specialized field, can cite IMFDB without any confusion.
Thank you.