How do you organize your collection?

[Majin Blu]

Originally Posted by slimdude

That's a mess. How can possibly find what you're looking for. Why not just go alphabetical order from A to Z throughout. It would be a lot easier.

Maybe that system is easier for them....the owner of the collection.

[Zillamon51]

Strict alphabetical, A - Z, by title. I don't care about sequels and such; Army of Darkness goes in the A's, for example. One of the reasons for this, is that new stuff doesn't get integrated right away. When there's a stack of new titles, then I shelve them, using my collection list in this site's app as a guide. The exception is numbers; 30 Days of Night goes under T for "thirty." That's how I was taught to do it in elementary school, and how I've always done it.

To keep consistent with the app, I've considered changing, but there are some other errors that I couldn't go along with anyways. For example, Ebirah: Horror of the Deep goes under E, despite the app incorrectly listing it as "Godzilla vs. the Sea Monster," because Kraken plastered the old title across the top of the box. And no way in hell I'm moving the Batman four-pack just because some knob listed it as "4 Film Favorites: Batman."

Currently, BDs and UHDs are together; DVDs are separate. Someday, I'll integrate them.

[slimdude]

Originally Posted by Zillamon51

Strict alphabetical, A - Z, by title. I don't care about sequels and such; Army of Darkness goes in the A's, for example. One of the reasons for this, is that new stuff doesn't get integrated right away. When there's a stack of new titles, then I shelve them, using my collection list in this site's app as a guide. The exception is numbers; 30 Days of Night goes under T for "thirty." That's how I was taught to do it in elementary school, and how I've always done it.

To keep consistent with the app, I've considered changing, but there are some other errors that I couldn't go along with anyways. For example, Ebirah: Horror of the Deep goes under E, despite the app incorrectly listing it as "Godzilla vs. the Sea Monster," because Kraken plastered the old title across the top of the box. And no way in hell I'm moving the Batman four-pack just because some knob listed it as "4 Film Favorites: Batman."

Currently, BDs and UHDs are together; DVDs are separate. Someday, I'll integrate them.

Technically that incorrect because that's not the way that particular movie title is spelled. If the title was spelled as: Thirty Days of Night instead of 30 Days of Night, then the movie would be put in with the T's. In my collection all of the numeric titles that begins with a number from 1-9 are stored before the alphabetical titles.

[brettgallman]

Mine is mostly by genre, then it's chronological within genres. I also have sections organized within each genre for franchises, directors, actors, etc. as I see fit. One shelf is kind of the "employees picks" section, which is just all my favorite stuff: franchises, directors, etc. This mostly happened because these were the movies I started collection with 20 years ago, so they've always just been grouped together. It just feels right, even if it leads to some dumb arrangements in the grand scheme of things. (For example, I have a George Romero section, but all of the Dead films are grouped with my favorite horror franchises. Ditto for Coscarelli and Phantasm, Craven and NOES, etc.).

[Socko]

I changed mine recently:
1. Boxsets or very thick cases
2. Steelbooks in alphabetical order
3. Amaray cases in alphabetical order.

It doesn’t matter if it is a regular BD or UHD

[Luke Dodge748]

Originally Posted by lethalkrs

I have a 15 foot long shelf that is nothing but Arrow, Scream/Shout Factory and Vin Syn! Over half is Arrow. (The Mondo Steelbook collection got too big to fit up there any more!)

Pics!

[calmblueocean81]

Originally Posted by slimdude

Technically that incorrect because that's not the way that particular movie title is spelled. If the title was spelled as: Thirty Days of Night instead of 30 Days of Night, then the movie would be put in with the T's. In my collection all of the numeric titles that begins with a number from 1-9 are stored before the alphabetical titles.

Funny, I've always spelled out the numbers myself, like the previous poster, but your thought process would make it easier to order at least (I have a weird block when trying to spell numbers, takes me longer to work that out!). But where would "2001" fit within a numerical list, for example? As in, do all the 1s and 2s go together, or is it strictly numeric so 2001 would at the end of the number list?

[eiknarf]

Originally Posted by calmblueocean81

Funny, I've always spelled out the numbers myself, like the previous poster, but your thought process would make it easier to order at least (I have a weird block when trying to spell numbers, takes me longer to work that out!). But where would "2001" fit within a numerical list, for example? As in, do all the 1s and 2s go together, or is it strictly numeric so 2001 would at the end of the number list?

Usually, when learning about writing numbers, and writing a paper for a class, anything under 10 is written out.
Such as:

I saw this one girl
I called two chics last night
I hooked up with three females last night
I got eight chic’s numbers last night

Once ya get to two digits you can use the numerals.
Such as:
I bought drinks for 11 chics last night
I blocked 12 of my ex girlfriends on Twitter
I have 57 emails from the girl I dumped last weekend

But movie titles are their own thing. You have to follow what the artist is calling it

And names as people are different from names as, say, a band/artist who use their names
Such as: Britney Spears versus Spears, Britney

If you were looking up Britney Spears in the phonebook you would look alphabetically under S
But if you were looking up Britney Spears in your CD collection or on iTunes or in the store you would look alphabetically under B. Because at that point she’s not a person. It’s a business.

[Zillamon51]

Originally Posted by slimdude

Technically that incorrect because that's not the way that particular movie title is spelled. If the title was spelled as: Thirty Days of Night instead of 30 Days of Night, then the movie would be put in with the T's. In my collection all of the numeric titles that begins with a number from 1-9 are stored before the alphabetical titles.

It. Doesn't. Matter.

Like I said, I was taught to convert numbers to words for alphabetization. So whether it's 2001: A Space Odyssey or "Two-thousand-one: A Space Odyssey," it goes in the same place.

[Gmamalis6]

First of all I put the DVD's and then the Blu-ray's from the good to the best film I like as I have only one big sized shelf and maybe I'll make another one if my collection is too big.

[calmblueocean81]

Originally Posted by eiknarf

Usually, when learning about writing numbers, and writing a paper for a class, anything under 10 is written out.
Such as:

I saw this one girl
I called two chics last night
I hooked up with three females last night
I got eight chic’s numbers last night

Once ya get to two digits you can use the numerals.
Such as:
I bought drinks for 11 chics last night
I blocked 12 of my ex girlfriends on Twitter
I have 57 emails from the girl I dumped last weekend

But movie titles are their own thing. You have to follow what the artist is calling it

And names as people are different from names as, say, a band/artist who use their names
Such as: Britney Spears versus Spears, Britney

If you were looking up Britney Spears in the phonebook you would look alphabetically under S
But if you were looking up Britney Spears in your CD collection or on iTunes or in the store you would look alphabetically under B. Because at that point she’s not a person. It’s a business.

I'm not sure if you were being totally serious there, but I laughed a *lot* at those various examples. Point well made

But on the last point, I do actually list artists by their first name in my folders and such. If I'd had a longer think about it before I began ripping and tagging, I'd have listed them as "surname, firstname", but I started with firstname first and I've long since past the point where I can change that method

[eiknarf]

Originally Posted by calmblueocean81

I'm not sure if you were being totally serious there, but I laughed a *lot* at those various examples. Point well made

But on the last point, I do actually list artists by their first name in my folders and such. If I'd had a longer think about it before I began ripping and tagging, I'd have listed them as "surname, firstname", but I started with firstname first and I've long since past the point where I can change that method

Yup. You're doing it correctly.

Tori Amos is under T on iTunes and on store shelves.
Tori Amos is under A in phone listings

Dave Chappelle is under D on iTunes and on store shelves
Dave Chappelle is under C in phone listings

Justin Bieber is under J on iTunes and on store shelves
Justin Bieber is under B in phone listings

etc etc etc

[hagios]

Not very well

[Blades1370]

By Spline color, following the color spectrum, starting with Red through Violet, next blacks, then whites..... I have a huge color chart book by my collection I check it against to ensure the correct placement.





























































































Just kidding.. alphabetically of course, my DVD's are mixed in with my 4K's and Blu-rays

[Majin Blu]

Lately, I've been considering the idea of organizing my library by production year. Maybe when I get a free weekend, I'll try it.

[fred25_Ca]

I've personally started to mix my vhs, dvd, blu ray and 4k together. So when I have a movie like Jaws or Rawhead Rex with multiple versions, I put the vhs facing front so I can see the covers on my shelves. They stand easily and I only buy those with the original posters that I want to display. I think it looks great. My wife is ready to kill me, mind you. :P1210.jpg

[CelestialAgent]

well, I guess like this

https://twitter.com/asexualflower/st...799056899?s=21

Originally Posted by Majin Blu

Lately, I've been considering the idea of organizing my library by production year. Maybe when I get a free weekend, I'll try it.

I like this method, as that way you can chart the history of cinema. I used to have my directors embedded WITHIN organisation by year, however the issue with that is the back and forth, especially if their career spans several decades, or their first film is several years before they actually break out. However, production and release years can sometimes differ quite dramatically.

[hatchet man]

While my collection is rather small I have my horror as stand alone in alphabetical order while everything else is in alphabetical order together. Since horror is my favorite genre I feel like my movies & figurines deserve their own space lol. Sounds crazy I know

[TripleHBK]

Originally Posted by hatchet man

While my collection is rather small I have my horror as stand alone in alphabetical order while everything else is in alphabetical order together. Since horror is my favorite genre I feel like my movies & figurines deserve their own space lol. Sounds crazy I know

Not crazy at all. You are essentially sorting by genre and then alphabetical by separating Horror. I didn't do this until my collection went over 1000 or so but now it's the only way I could imagine sorting. There's a reason 99.9% of video stores sorted by genre and then alphabetical.

[calmblueocean81]

Originally Posted by fred25_Ca

I've personally started to mix my vhs, dvd, blu ray and 4k together. So when I have a movie like Jaws or Rawhead Rex with multiple versions, I put the vhs facing front so I can see the covers on my shelves. They stand easily and I only buy those with the original posters that I want to display. I think it looks great. My wife is ready to kill me, mind you. :PAttachment 255144

Thats actually a really interesting approach, especially when you get to show off all the various covers from the different formats. Its a bit of a moot point in my case, as I've long since got rid of almost all of my VHS titles, and a good chunk of my DVDs too.

I feel like blu-ray has, by and large, the worst cover art when compared to the older formats like VHS and DVD even. For whatever odd reason, so many blus come out with these awful photoshop nightmares, whereas the older formats often just used the posters made for the movies, which have more of a classic feel to them. The only exception might be if they have specially commissioned artwork for a new release, though even that can often end up being an overly-complicated looking mess, compared to the original one-sheet.

Also, while I understand the reasoning behind it (differentiation with red HD-DVDs), I've always hated the blue cases for blu-rays and find that it regularly clashes with the cover art of the movie.