Scandi Delights - discussion

[effCup]

This thread is for discussion of matters relating to the Scandi Delights id project thread. Please post any discussion/comments/etc. here and not there, thanks.

[beutelwolf]

82/83 is Helle Kjaer

0143 is also this:

She might be Leila Vigso

000171 might be Jane Warner, hard to tell

000205 is Pia Fris

2501 is Tina Preston
2528/2530 is Claire Margarson

001184 is Pauline Lee

001364/5 seems to be Trine Michelsen

[effCup]

Originally Posted by beutelwolf

2528/2530 is Claire Margarson

Firstly: I recommend downloading the text file(s) linked in the thread & import them into a spreadsheet app (e.g. MS Excel, OfficeLibre Calc, google docs, etc.). A great many models are already named. That will help save some of the eyestrain.

2528 is Maria Berggren (aka Amy Bishop). That's what the doc. says but also I recognised her, i.e. a known set of hers--see some pics. from Model Directory in her thread.
I haven't got round to checking it yet but 2530 is listed as Claire Margarson and I don't doubt you.

Secondly: don't rely upon the model ids given in the text docs. A great many are probably correct but I've already been burnt by a couple that were not/I wasn't sufficiently careful about. So: eyestrain not entirely dispensed.

I don't envisage needing to spend too much time id'ing many of the models as a consequence. Maybe we'd be better to devote more of our attention to: a) those that are incorrectly id'd b) those for whom an id is not already known/we don't recognise? /shrug/ Just a suggestion.

Not all sets numbered/listed are present. There are gaps.

[beutelwolf]

Originally Posted by effCup

Firstly: I recommend downloading the text file(s) linked in the thread & import them into a spreadsheet app (e.g. MS Excel, OfficeLibre Calc, google docs, etc.). A great many models are already named. That will help save some of the eyestrain.

Sorry, I didn't read all the text, and failed to spot the existence of that file. I only noticed that images were identified within the picture.

2528 is Maria Berggren (aka Amy Bishop). That's what the doc. says but also I recognised her, i.e. a known set of hers--see some pics. from Model Directory in her thread.
I haven't got round to checking it yet but 2530 is listed as Claire Margarson and I don't doubt you.

I was referring to the one on the left, not the right. Even in the text file there is a reference to Margarson as 2528:

922 2528 CLAIRE MARGARSON 91 "beach and rocks, red bikini, eating fruit. British dark blonde"

It's very frustrating about the original source that leading 0s make a difference.

[effCup]

Originally Posted by beutelwolf

Sorry, I didn't read all the text, and failed to spot the existence of that file. I only noticed that images were identified within the picture.



I was referring to the one on the left, not the right. Even in the text file there is a reference to Margarson as 2528:

922 2528 CLAIRE MARGARSON 91 "beach and rocks, red bikini, eating fruit. British dark blonde"

It's very frustrating about the original source that leading 0s make a difference.

Yes, sorry. My bad. Excel stripped the leading zeros from the file as I was organising it. Do I need to re-do the text to preserve all the leading zeros? That would be a right pita because although I have the original text the leading-zero-stripping happened right at the beginning of the process, i.e. I'd have to re-do all the formatting, cleaning, etc. Yikes. I'll say no for now but... maybe later, maybe.

[40plus]

Originally Posted by effCup

Yes, sorry. My bad. Excel stripped the leading zeros from the file as I was organising it. Do I need to re-do the text to preserve all the leading zeros? That would be a right pita because although I have the original text the leading-zero-stripping happened right at the beginning of the process, i.e. I'd have to re-do all the formatting, cleaning, etc. Yikes. I'll say no for now but... maybe later, maybe.

Try highlighting the relevant column in Excel and formatting it as plain text. Although Excel assumes it's a number when importing, it usually retains the whole string and just defaults to number format.

If that doesn't work, try editing one of the number fields adding ' at the front and see if it displays the leading zeros.


Regards

40+

[effCup]

Originally Posted by 40plus

Try highlighting the relevant column in Excel and formatting it as plain text. Although Excel assumes it's a number when importing, it usually retains the whole string and just defaults to number format.

If that doesn't work, try editing one of the number fields adding ' at the front and see if it displays the leading zeros.


Regards

40+

The original text is just that: text. It is not (properly) delimited. It is not columns (at that stage). If I go back to the stage where Excel first encounters the text & (wants to) strip the leading zeros, then I'm losing an awful lot of "tidying" & formatting of that text. I used some regex prev. but a lot of the text is too "loose"/irregular for that to cover all the formatting/cleaning required.

I know, "plan to throw one away..."
Fred was Right, said Fred.

Perhaps I should upload the original (un-cleaned) text, so you can see it yourself... & perhaps have a go.

[miri]

It might already be known that @ Pinüps.dk, there are photoset references(with no 2-letter prefix code) that have 4 digit codes and some that have 6 digit codes. Some of these photosets are the work of Allan Sass. However there some of these photosets that are the work of other photographers that would usually have a 2-letter prefix code proceeding the numbers.

For example: The work of Jean Rougeron @ Pinüps.dk usually has a 2-letter prefix code of JA proceeding the numbers of the photoset reference. Photoset reference 002840(Ruth Gleeson's photoset which is presumably the work of Jean Rougeron) has no 2-letter prefix code proceeding the numbers. There are other examples of the work of Peter Flodqvist(which usually has a 2-letter prefix code of PF proceeding the numbers of the photoset reference) has no 2-letter prefix code proceeding the numbers.

--

Something that also might already be known about model names; a model's name credited to a photoset(@ Pinüps.dk or elsewhere) may not always be her most known name. Sometimes the name a model was using at the time the photoset was taken is the name attributed to the photoset. The name a model is credited as @ Pinüps.dk may be different that the model's VEF thread title name.

For example: Anna Karlsson(Pinüps.dk) AKA Lorna Mayfield(VEF)

[miri]

[Wasn't sure if this project was for ID'ing the unknowns @ Pinüps.dk and/or for known models(with perhaps different AKAs) who have content @ both VEF/Pinüps.dk, so feel free to remove if necessary]

---

Originally Posted by effCup

Pascale Vital @ SässPhotography/Pinüps.dk:
(1 photoset from Jean Rougeron - JA0011)

(JA0011_0 - JA0011_4)



And here she is @ VEF...

As Conny with pics posted by svga and referenced by effCup:
http://vintage-erotica-forum.com/sho...0&postcount=23
http://vintage-erotica-forum.com/sho...7&postcount=60

Originally Posted by svga

As Fleur de Lis'e with pics posted by martsm and referenced by johnmcwhatsit:
http://vintage-erotica-forum.com/sho...&postcount=180
http://vintage-erotica-forum.com/sho...2&postcount=50

Originally Posted by martsm

There are also several posts @ VEF with name references of Pascale Vital, however I'm unsure if she is the same as the model listed @ Pinüps.dk. (she is mostly wearing sunglassses in her Jean Rougeron photoset)

[effCup]

Re. the loss of leading zeros (due to Excel):

I've been re-looking at the raw data & have improved my regular expressions so that it'd be a bit less manual work to re-do the data into columns (mostly), but the thing is that I think the only way to prevent Excel stripping the leading zeros is to put a ' before them, and unlike where one does that manually within Excel, if I do that to the text file prior to importing into/opening with Excel (that's the only reasonable/manageable way, given the quantity), then they remain visible within excel. That is: Excel then doesn't treat them as "special" characters. So: that way keeps the leading zeros but also prepends a '. So I still wonder whether it's really worth all the effort of re-doing the data?