imfdb.org  

Go Back   imfdb.org > The Forum > imfdb

Reply
 
Thread Tools Display Modes
  #1  
Old 11-22-2009, 10:02 PM
Yournamehere Yournamehere is offline
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Nov 2008
Posts: 912
Default Reservoir Dogs Controversy

Of the few pages I've done, Reservoir Dogs is one of them. I took what was made of it when I first joined and revamped it with better screenshots and better type. Recently, a user named Gunman69 went in and replaced all my hard work. Some things were nice like the actual used screen guns (which weren't on here at the time and no one told me about, so it was nice for someone to put them there), but, and I know some of you will agree with me on this one, the screencaps were, in my humble opinion, a tad worse than what I had originally put on there.

http://www.imfdb.org/index.php?title...s&oldid=206707
This is my version of the page, the older one, made to include the screen used guns.

http://www.imfdb.org/index.php?title=Reservoir_Dogs
This is the current version of the page.

Now, I notice that Gunman69 has added a new gun (Smith & Wesson 669) and a few more screenshots for the Smith & Wesson Model 19 revolvers at the bottom, but that is not the argument right now. Those can be fixed or added later. I'm trying to figure out which screenshots would be more or less seen as "better".

In my own defense, mine are larger and able to be rescaled to look at the guns in better detail, they are in .png format which, although timely to load, are much clearer than .jpeg format, and all of my screenshots are trimmed completely free of black border, which looks cheap. Mine are also from a fullscreen version and Gunman69s are from a widescreen version, but that is where preference of a type of screen comes into play.

Long story short, should we keep Gunman69s "new and improved" caps, or go back to mine? I obviously vote for mine, hands down.
Reply With Quote
  #2  
Old 11-22-2009, 10:43 PM
Ace Oliveira Ace Oliveira is offline
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Aug 2009
Posts: 345
Default

I know my buddy Gunman will hate for this, but I prefer YNH's screencaps. They're of better quality. I don't exactly like the close-ups and the PNG thing but they are of better quality.
Reply With Quote
  #3  
Old 11-22-2009, 10:50 PM
predator20's Avatar
predator20 predator20 is offline
IMFDB Admin
 
Join Date: Jul 2009
Location: FL
Posts: 767
Default

My comments are on the talk page. Threw up some comparison pics.
http://www.imfdb.org/index.php?title...Reservoir_Dogs

EDIT:
Well, they were on the talk page Gunman69 took them off. (Which is fine) So I guess they got it worked out.

Gunmans pics did have a better color, from my comparison.

Last edited by predator20; 11-22-2009 at 11:02 PM. Reason: comments were taken off talk page.
Reply With Quote
  #4  
Old 11-22-2009, 11:21 PM
MoviePropMaster2008's Avatar
MoviePropMaster2008 MoviePropMaster2008 is offline
IMFDB Admin
 
Join Date: Dec 2008
Location: California
Posts: 1,191
Default

I don't care WHO puts up the screen cap, as long as the one doing the replacing is of SUPERIOR quality.

There are some pages on IMFDB I'm itching for someone to replace the CRAP screencaps. I know there will be some egos bruised, but per the rules, IMFDB allows for any replacement IF the image is of superior quality.

So, I sure hope you guys get it all worked out. And even now, if a show can be replaced with a newer, more awesome shot then go for it.

I remember recently a brand new member (complete noob) wanted to put in 14-16 new shots of a particular gun on a page I built. I told him 'no'. If he had new shots of hither to unidentified guns, then all is good, but for him to CRUSH a new section with tons and tons of shots of the same gun is ridiculous. I am so glad we are clamping down on that idiocy.
Reply With Quote
  #5  
Old 11-22-2009, 11:31 PM
Ace Oliveira Ace Oliveira is offline
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Aug 2009
Posts: 345
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by MoviePropMaster2008 View Post
I don't care WHO puts up the screen cap, as long as the one doing the replacing is of SUPERIOR quality.

There are some pages on IMFDB I'm itching for someone to replace the CRAP screencaps. I know there will be some egos bruised, but per the rules, IMFDB allows for any replacement IF the image is of superior quality.

So, I sure hope you guys get it all worked out. And even now, if a show can be replaced with a newer, more awesome shot then go for it.

I remember recently a brand new member (complete noob) wanted to put in 14-16 new shots of a particular gun on a page I built. I told him 'no'. If he had new shots of hither to unidentified guns, then all is good, but for him to CRUSH a new section with tons and tons of shots of the same gun is ridiculous. I am so glad we are clamping down on that idiocy.
And who was that?
Reply With Quote
  #6  
Old 11-22-2009, 11:34 PM
MoviePropMaster2008's Avatar
MoviePropMaster2008 MoviePropMaster2008 is offline
IMFDB Admin
 
Join Date: Dec 2008
Location: California
Posts: 1,191
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Ace Oliveira View Post
And who was that?
It wasn't YOU so you don't have to freak out.
Reply With Quote
  #7  
Old 11-22-2009, 11:36 PM
Ace Oliveira Ace Oliveira is offline
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Aug 2009
Posts: 345
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by MoviePropMaster2008 View Post
It wasn't YOU so you don't have to freak out.
I know. I just didn't catch up. I'm sorry if I'm pissing you off but, Who was it? We don't really get much screencappers now. Most new members don't know how to screencap.
Reply With Quote
  #8  
Old 11-22-2009, 11:57 PM
AdAstra2009's Avatar
AdAstra2009 AdAstra2009 is offline
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Nov 2008
Location: Maryland
Posts: 1,067
Default

I agree, revert back to YNH's version.

Gunman69's screenshots, while they are widescreen are too small. He also has alot of repetitive caps of low quality.
Reply With Quote
  #9  
Old 11-23-2009, 12:34 AM
Yournamehere Yournamehere is offline
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Nov 2008
Posts: 912
Default

After reading the rules, standards and principles, I have another question to pose; why are widescreen images considered better than fullscreens?

Furthermore, my Reservoir Dogs page was made prior to the rules, standards and principles page and therefore I couldn't have followed the conditions such as widescreen/jpeg formatting etc. I built the page purely to look it's best, which is why I used the fullscreen version (to get bigger shots) and .png formatted images (which are bigger but allow for more detail). The question I am posing now is, should we allow the pages that were made prior to the rules, standards and principles page to slip through the preferences of .jpeg or widescreen so long as the look good and/or better than any other change that can be made? In other words, is quality the most important element in a page, or should the preference of a certain type of file or shot be taken into consideration first at the potential sacrifice in quality? Where is the gray area? Would my case be an exception to the rule?

Last edited by Yournamehere; 11-23-2009 at 12:37 AM.
Reply With Quote
  #10  
Old 11-23-2009, 12:40 AM
AdAstra2009's Avatar
AdAstra2009 AdAstra2009 is offline
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Nov 2008
Location: Maryland
Posts: 1,067
Default

Widescreen is generally preferred as with fullscreen you are possibly losing something on the left or the right.
However if the widescreen screencaps are lower quality, the point is moot as your fullscreen screencaps are of SUPERIOR QUALITY.

I say go ahead and revert back to your original version, but get a better shot of the LAPD's S&W Model 19s and add the S&W 669.
Reply With Quote
Reply

Thread Tools
Display Modes

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off

Forum Jump


All times are GMT. The time now is 04:20 PM.


Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.0
Copyright ©2000 - 2022, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.