Delete a Message
G-MANN
Does anyone think it's time we set some rules concerning background vehicles? I'm not saying we should have no background vehicles, and I sometimes add background vehicles, but I think sometimes people (I don't want to name any names here because I'm trying to attack anyone, just trying sort things out in general) are just posting too many background vehicles that have nothing to do with the action or just are too commonplace to be worth noting, and it just takes up more and more space and as antp has said we will eventually run out of space and have to move to another which isn't an easy task is it? I believe in showing the best quality pictures possible of cars that play a real role in films, I don't like the idea of having to compress images to save space when it wasted by vehicles that frank aren't really worth listing.
Here's the factors that I believe should justify posting a 1 star background vehicle:
1) If it has some kind of connection to the characters or action, ie if it brakes when someone walks in front of it, swerves if a cars cuts in front of it, or can be seen in the driveway at a character's home. And if fits this description, it has to be somewhat visible, not just a big blur.
2) If it is particularly rare or unusual car, not something that was a common car during the time of filming. This should be really be case with films made in the last 20 years, maybe an exception can be made for films from earlier periods.
3) If the camera dwells on the vehicle or if it was well visible (close to the camera) during an important scene.
I think from now on if it's not immediately obvious to people why the car is worth listing or for those who haven't seen the film, the contributor should post some kind of explanation why the car is worth noting, if they can't think of a reason why it is more significant to the film than all the other background traffic vehicles (there are usually 100s of traffic vehicles in films set in cities, we can't list them all) then it shouldn't be listed.
Things I don't like seeing:
1) overhead shots of large car parks containing tons of cars (unless a "used" vehicle is in the car park
2) Shots of cars passing by that appear through the rear windshield (or side windows or front windshield, during interior shots of characters driving or riding in cars.
I could list more things but I'll leave it for now (I might edit this post later).
Does anyone agree with me? By the way if anyone would like to mention any background vehicles I've posted that you think are gratuitous, I'll be more than happy to discuss them and perhaps remove them. I'm tired of having to nitpick about gratuitous background vehicles whenever they appear, and I think everyone is probably sick of me doing this (it doesn't seem to change much does it?), I'm just trying to offer constructive criticism, but if as a site we cut on background vehicles (surely everyone realises there's a lot of irrelevant background vehicles on this site), then I won't have to keep picking people up and far more importantly, we'll save space and be able to focus more on the important cars in films.
Here's the factors that I believe should justify posting a 1 star background vehicle:
1) If it has some kind of connection to the characters or action, ie if it brakes when someone walks in front of it, swerves if a cars cuts in front of it, or can be seen in the driveway at a character's home. And if fits this description, it has to be somewhat visible, not just a big blur.
2) If it is particularly rare or unusual car, not something that was a common car during the time of filming. This should be really be case with films made in the last 20 years, maybe an exception can be made for films from earlier periods.
3) If the camera dwells on the vehicle or if it was well visible (close to the camera) during an important scene.
I think from now on if it's not immediately obvious to people why the car is worth listing or for those who haven't seen the film, the contributor should post some kind of explanation why the car is worth noting, if they can't think of a reason why it is more significant to the film than all the other background traffic vehicles (there are usually 100s of traffic vehicles in films set in cities, we can't list them all) then it shouldn't be listed.
Things I don't like seeing:
1) overhead shots of large car parks containing tons of cars (unless a "used" vehicle is in the car park
2) Shots of cars passing by that appear through the rear windshield (or side windows or front windshield, during interior shots of characters driving or riding in cars.
I could list more things but I'll leave it for now (I might edit this post later).
Does anyone agree with me? By the way if anyone would like to mention any background vehicles I've posted that you think are gratuitous, I'll be more than happy to discuss them and perhaps remove them. I'm tired of having to nitpick about gratuitous background vehicles whenever they appear, and I think everyone is probably sick of me doing this (it doesn't seem to change much does it?), I'm just trying to offer constructive criticism, but if as a site we cut on background vehicles (surely everyone realises there's a lot of irrelevant background vehicles on this site), then I won't have to keep picking people up and far more importantly, we'll save space and be able to focus more on the important cars in films.