I am not an absolute reference. Other members can also give their opinion on cars judged as "too background".

Well, shall we say your decision is final on whether a car is too background (even though certain individuals pay no attention )?

Well, depends what is "too background": your tolerance level is not the same as the average one

Well I thought it might a be way of stopping too many far too background cars cluttering up pages while keeping those who want add as many background cars as possible happy. But if you say these "too background" cars should NOT be added at all, then I'll forget this idea, and EVERYONE else should take note.

And I'll add that it is not easy to say if a car is a random background one or not.
Few examples:
http://www.imcdb.org/vehicle_12609-Ferrari-360-Spider.html => for me these are random background cars, for the other member they are intentionally put there.
And in many movies the background cars driving in the streets are driven by actors... cf http://www.imcdb.org/vehicle_67794-Triumph-GT6-1973.html

I am not really sure that adding such extra rating is a so good idea. If the problem is the "really too background" cars, adding such rating is not the good solution as these cars should not be on the site.

Rather no star then for these.
But if such rating is added, this should not depend on the rarity of the car. Just if it is a background car having no real interaction but still a place in the movie, or a real background passing-by car.
You suggest that admins should do that for cars that they listed, I do not see what would be the other solution: it is like for the others ratings, it can not really be guessed correctly from the pictures.
And I disagree of allowing to list every car that passes the camera, it fills the database and disk, so it is not because we add something to hide these that they should be allowed.

How about we create a new star listing, "1/2 star", given to any car that is either completely irrelevant to the basic mis-en-scene of the movie and not something that stands out (like something expensive or rare or very noticeable), and we set up film pages so these "half star" cars are listed on a seperate page, people can look at them if they like by clicking on a link, or the page setup can exclude them unless the viewer selects an "All cars" option (like the way you can filter 3-5 star, 2 star and 1 star cars in the page setup. This way sixcyl and other like-minded contributors can still add these "extreme background cars" but they won't clog up the standard page for people who aren't interested in seeing EVERY car that passes by the camera, if they are, then they can still view them.

Only problem is it could take ages to re-rate all the extreme background cars as "1/2 star" cars (personally I think the main admins should do all the movie's they've added, there's no way poor antp could be expected to go through the entire site doing this by himself). This could put an end to the whole Background cars debate and satisfy everyone!

If there's anything you don't quite understand in the main paragraph, I'll try and re-explain it (I'm not I've managed to explain my idea in the best way possible).

Find by me, as we can always say that there is a small vehicle behind a main visable one.

We can list background cars (even if G-MANN does not like that) but no cropping and no zooming. Cars must appear as they appear on screen. The site is not just a car list, it must also keep the "in movies" part.
If it is too small then it is just too small, and probably not worth mentioning.

I would like to see more cars that are in the far background. If the car is too small and hard to identify, the contributer should crop the car itself and make the picture bigger.