When I started this assignment I was interested in how much money is actually going on in the film industry. What costs a movie? What is the budget? How much money does it produce? And how do these figures compare with our ratings. I thought it was easy to check the data on the site of IMDb. But unfortunately all I found was very incomplete data. I checked all 150 films that we have seen since January 2015. And guess what. There are only 56 films that both show you the budget and the profits. In addition, all amounts are mentioned in different currencies. So I have to convert them to dollars or an other currency unit. Additionally, in all the movies descriptions that are not from the United States, there is almost no sign of costs and benefits to find. So I have to check at other websites if there is additional information.
After that extensive check this resulted in 69 films with complete financial information. I think I should leave out the series. These often run over several years and are applying varying budgets. While a film only runs once and receives just one budget. Another thing is that these figures represent only periods when movies are played. Some play longer periods than others. Because they are more popular they bring in more money. But that says nothing about the quality. Our list shows that there are only three films made which costs less than one million dollar. However, there are 14 films which benefits less than 1 million. I made two text files of them. One with the highest budget on the top. The other list has the highest gross at the top.
Then it is important to read the text-file into Processing and display it in the display window. A simple task. But that turned out to be more complicated than I thought. It comes down to that there is a lot of attention in the tutorials to get a text-file into Processing’s console. But how to get the data into the display window I could not find anywhere. I got my question answered 50% through the Processing Forum. And partly solved it myself. Been busy with it for one afternoon. And this is the first result. Not very impressive but all data that is in the text file is displayed in my Processing display window. And that was the first goal I had in mind.
The next step I need to take is to get the data lists separated. It should be possible to reposition the movie-titles, budget and revenue. If I cannot do that I cannot deal with the layout. Incidentally, at this moment the sort and reverse functions are quite handy. And I have changed the font to Futura Book.
How does the program know which budget and income are associated with a movie? That is a question for me too. For the two digit columns are mixed-up. The budget and the income lists are both sorted from large to small amounts. The budget list thus does not have the same order as on the income list. So I have added film titles both to the budget and the income list. In that manner it is easy to check for me if the lines of the budget is written to the right amounts of the income list.
Changed the background colour to a very dark grey. Furthermore, now the budget and income-lists are connected by a line to one another. Everything looks pretty cluttered. But that will change in the next design. What’s striking is that the biggest blockbuster has a horizontal line. ‘Interstellar’ with a budget of 165,000.000 dollar and a total income of 675,020.017 dollar.
I’ve started checking the film titles. Whether they are written correctly and without mistakes. All non-English-language film-titles translated. Les Petits Mouchoirs is Little White Lies. Loin des Hommes is Far from Men. Relatos Salvajes: Wild Tales. Marie Heurtin: Marie’s Story. Elddfjall: Volcano. And that is one side of data visualization. You must be an administrator, Sherlock Holmes, graphic designer, translator, animation designer and programmer at the same time. I have given the chart some more space. And the distance is increased to the lists of numbers. Which suddenly brings me to a new idea.
I now work in Processing 2. Its time to download the new Processing 3 and fund the Processing Foundation. That is the least I can do because I work daily with Processing. In Processing 3 you can use the Table Class. It’s easier to work with because everything is now in one text file.
The $ sign was added but I do not find it successful. Maybe find another solution. Right now you do not see what the amounts of the lists are. I know that the left-hand amounts are for the budget. The right column represents the amount of income.
Because ‘Interstellar’ is misrepresented I have thrown this film out. I think the columns should have proper labels. And I need room for doing that. I have also added the sequence of 0-10 to the right. The numbers 0-10 represent the ratings we have given to the films. The idea is that I’m once again going to draw the lines but now from the income-list to our ratings.
I have adapted the total graph a bit. Lines start and stop now slightly closer to the lists of numbers. I have added the vertical text ‘Amounts in American Dollars’. The overall chart remains somewhat chaotic but I think the result is not disappointing.
Added colour. I chose green for the films that cost less than their revenue. And I choose red for the films that have cost more than their revenue. Now the graph begins to show a disadvantage. Because the lines are thicker it is difficult to see to what amounts they belong.
I replaced the line function by the bezier function. Now it is better to see which amount belongs to which line. And the overall chart looks slightly smoother. Of the 64 films, 26 films have made a loss. 38 Films have made profits. Mr. Turner eventually made losses but was still on top of our rating. Locke is a movie made for 2,000,000 dollar. It made a profit of 5,000.000 dollar and received a 10 in our rating. The Salvation has cost 11,524.796 dollar. To our knowledge it has brought 5000 dollar (which I strongly doubt). But it still gets a 7 in our rating. In short, data visualization is very interesting, very time-consuming and precise puzzling. Actually I had to code the program much smarter. But that would cost even more time.