Collectorz.com Forum

Is it possible to have a sort option for the actorslist?
Sort on last/first real name would be fine.

And secondly copy the actorslist from one movie to another?
In movies having many episodes like StarTrek, Stargate, and others, it often happens that the sites from which the movie info is retrieved, does not have the complete actorslist with every episode and you have to add all manually.

Yes; enable the option 'Show Cast sorted on actor name" under Settings\Preferences.


The only way to do that is to duplicate the entire movie; there is no way to copy only the cast.

Tnx for the reply,

1. overlooked that option completly.

2. Is is possible to add a facility to copy the actorslist in future release or is that to difficult to accomplish ?

We'd have to investigate the feasibility first; thanks for the suggestion.

I too am hoping that this is in a future update. While I have quiet a few box sets like the Die Hard, Lethal Weapon, Aliens, Rocky, and a lot more. When adding from an online query; the actors, directors, producers and writers it only adds for the first movie in the set. I have to then manually add all those roles for the remainder of the movies. This is extremely time consuming. It would be nice to either be able to choose more than just one title in adding/updating from IMDB or possibly merging several titles together while editing. I have noticed that when updating, that it first searches for title, then title extension and then by actors. So once I have the first movie of the box set in, when updating again it looks at the actors and then only displays that particular movie. None of the other movies are even displayed which makes it impossible to add the actors from the sequels.

Maybe having the option to display the box set which only displays the general info that is common on all the movies and then having a drop down which displays each movie in a tree view of the box set. And by clicking on any one of the titles in the tree you are presented with the info on that particular movie. I know that this is a lot of work for the coders but it's worth a shout-out. Thanks

For that matter shouldn't the program have a built in way to handle these collectors sets? They are very common these days. I just bought the Universal Studios Monsters Legacy set. I want each of my Frankensein movies (for instance) listed individually, not just as part of this set. But I also want to make note of the fact that they are in fact part of this set. Some of the movies share a Disk in fact. I want the program to show each movie as an individual entry but somehow also show that they are in a set and which disk they are on.

I agree that we need a way of showing box sets. Music Collector does it by having albums and disks, but then everything is a disk within an album, which is over the top.

At the moment I am experimenting with creating a record for the box set itself, and then a record for each film within the box set. I get the details for the box from Amazon, and the details for each film from IMDB.

I then use the Series field to group these together, and a User field to improve the grouing still further..

This helps somewhat. I think what I would like to see is a new field to indicate the record type (Box Set, Disk, Film, TV Series, TV Season, TV Episode, Actor etc). Then we could start adding move info and group the info better. This way of doing things would make the system vastly more flexible, but may be difficult for new users. It would also require that we could save our filters, or have far more built in filters.

However, the more I think about it, the more I am convinced that we need to retain a flat file structure with user-defined recursion, rather than have specific levels for boxes.

I think that lots of users have their own solution for box sets. It was the first thing that I missed. For the moment I use a user level field for indicating that a movie is part of a boxset. No matter which solution you use there are allways advantages and disadvantages though...

As a purely testing user of Movie Collector at the moment, please correct me if you disagree, but I find that CATvids, with it's Video/DVD main level and a Contents detail level better. Box sets can be held within the contents level.

Ian

We have thought about having that two level structure too, as we do the same in Music Collector.
But we decided that for movies, this would, in general, be more of a hassle than a real benefit.

There is also the matter of how you look at your collection and how you want to catalog it.
If you want to catalog which MOVIES you have, then it is more logical to have the MOVIE as the main item in the database (like we do in Movie Collector).
However, if you are more interested in which BOXES you own, then it makes more sense to have the boxes, the physical items, as the main objects in the database.

Both views have their advantages and disadvantages, it's hard to say which is better. I DO know that it is difficult to combine both in one easy to use user interface / data structure.

I don't wholly agree with this.

First and foremost I want my collection software to be accurate. And classifying to be also accurate.

The problem with your suggestion, is that when I number my boxes, for exemple I have the "Van Helsing" ultimate edition wich comes with Dracula, the wolfman and frankenstein, on 1 single additional disc, if as you suggest I listed each movie I would then have 3 additional numbers and nowhere to put them. I print out number labels (much like a library) and stick them on my dvd's. When someone borrows the 1 disc, i would have to search for 3 different movies to list as loaned... not very practical.

There should be a way to check a box for box set, then once that box is checked you can have a empty field where to add the names of the additional movies that come with the box set.

In addition there should be a way to add a movie, and select wether or not you want it "counted" numbered... the in / not in collection does not offer this possibility to my knowledge items are still counted (indexed) wether or not they are in collection which gives you a false count of your collection.

I know you only add / modify features when it will benefit the majority, but I also believe the majority most likely does not read the forum, and thus we never really hear their opinions, they just use what is presented to them. However those on the forum, are the hardcore collectors and really the ones your product helps, they use it, offer their own modification (those that have the knowledge) help others graps it etc....

The point of a collecting software is not only to "catalog" what you own, but to do it as accurately as possible, for real collectorz anyhow, I would not list my First Edition books, under paperback for instance just for convenience sake. (speaking of book collectorz how about a check box for signed copies?)

Anyways I keep awaiting changes and welcome each one that brings collertorz software closer to what I wish for and I'm sure someday all my little wishes will finally get done . Not being a programmer I can't do modification myself but from reading here I know it's also not simple so I can be patient.

Happy holidays to all