 |
|
|
|
Welcome to the Invelos forums. Please read the forum
rules before posting.
Read access to our public forums is open to everyone. To post messages, a free
registration is required.
If you have an Invelos account, sign in to post.
|
|
|
|
|
Invelos Forums->DVD Profiler: Contribution Discussion |
Page:
1 2 3 4  Previous Next
|
|
Art Directors |
|
|
|
|
|
| Author |
Message |
| Registered: May 18, 2007 |  Posts: 389 |
| | Posted: | | | | I came across this:
Senior Art Director
Stand By Art Director
My question is would this be allowed? |
| | Registered: March 13, 2007 | | Posts: 21,610 |
| | Posted: | | | | I would say Senior AD is OK , particularly if the have a listing for regular ADs in the credits. Stand By AD...I don't think so.
Skip | | | ASSUME NOTHING!!!!!!
CBE, MBE, MoA and proud of it.
Outta here
Billy Video |
| | Registered: March 13, 2007 | | Posts: 2,759 |
| | Posted: | | | | I would support Senior Art Director personally even though the rules do not allow it. |
| | Registered: March 13, 2007 | Reputation:  | | Posts: 6,635 |
| | Posted: | | | | The problem is that it is not listed under either the 'Role' or the 'Credited As' columns of the Crew Table in the Rules, therefore, it is not permissible.
It doesn't matter whether one user or another user thinks its OK from their perspective. That is the proverbial slippery slope. Where do you draw the line? Maybe I think Managing Art Director should be included or Senior Producer or some other such variation. It will never end.
Ken wrote a rule which eliminates these ambiguities. It's not in one of the two columns designated in the crew table, therefore, it's not allowed. Simple. No arguments.
If you don't like the way the Rule is worded, then lobby Ken for a change. In the meantime, it is unambiguous.
Why do we keep having these discussions? | | | | Hal |
|   | T!M | | Profiling since Dec. 2000 |
| Registered: March 13, 2007 | Reputation:  |  Posts: 8,722 |
| | Posted: | | | | Quoting RHo: Quote:
I would support Senior Art Director personally even though the rules do not allow it. Me too - just like I'd enter, say, a "supervising re-recording mixer". For both it could be argued that they're technically not allowed because they're not listed in the column, but that entire system is fundamentally flawed. We'll never be able to include all possible name variants in that table, while just the tiniest little bit of common sense tells you that the "senior art director" is just another label for the supervising art director, and that a "supervising re-recording mixer" shouldn't be left out either. As for why we keep having these discussions - it's because we're not just collecting data for the sake of collecting data, but instead, people want to enter the people that deserve to be entered. Whether they're credited with a slightly different label doesn't, or shouldn't matter. P.S. I'd say no to "stand by art director". Unlike the "senior" one, that isn't the "functional equivalent" of what we're looking for. |
| | Registered: March 13, 2007 | | Reputation: | | Posts: 6,635 |
| | Posted: | | | | Quoting T!M: Quote:
Me too - just like I'd enter, say, a "supervising re-recording mixer". For both it could be argued that they're technically not allowed because they're not listed in the column, but that entire system is fundamentally flawed. We'll never be able to include all possible name variants in that table, while just the tiniest little bit of common sense tells you that the "senior art director" is just another label for the supervising art director, and that a "supervising re-recording mixer" shouldn't be left out either. Then get Ken to change the Rule. Until then, entering these is against the Rules! Quoting T!M: Quote:
As for why we keep having these discussions - it's because we're not just collecting data for the sake of collecting data, but instead, people want to enter the people that deserve to be entered. Whether they're credited with a slightly different label doesn't, or shouldn't matter. Ken gave us custom categories for you to track whatever you want, so this argument is bogus. Maybe it "shouldn't matter", but the way the Rule is currently worded it does matter! Quoting T!M: Quote:
P.S. I'd say no to "stand by art director". Unlike the "senior" one, that isn't the "functional equivalent" of what we're looking for. Nowhere in the Rules does it allow for "functional equivalents". And who exactly is the arbiter of what is and is not a "functional equivalent"? You? | | | | Hal |
| | Registered: March 13, 2007 | | Posts: 21,610 |
| | Posted: | | | | It's not that the system is flawed half as much as Hal's fundamental argument, though I understand it and to some degree suppoirt it, is fundamentally flawed. We have never been able to, and never will be able to account for EVERY possible permutation that Hollywood can create. It's all based on experience and this where he and I part company. I recently for example saw credits for Super AD, Senior AD, and ADs,, along with a bunch of people under AD (which would not be included). The logic for AD but no one above that position escapes me, aside from an absolutely strict verbatim reading of the Rules, which is fine to a point, but can be problematic, in SOME cases. We have to recognize that our experience is constantly expanding, like i said Stand By AD, nope I can't support that,,, not even close.
Now again I will say that for those of you who watch my collection , you will find that I use the description field to clarify what the As Credited data says. For example, using AD, you might see in my collection Supervising Art Director, it would show in Contribution form as Art Director and if I were to Contribute the data, I would make note of what that precise credit actually was.
Skip | | | ASSUME NOTHING!!!!!!
CBE, MBE, MoA and proud of it.
Outta here
Billy Video | | | | Last edited: by Winston Smith |
| | Registered: March 13, 2007 | | Posts: 2,759 |
| | Posted: | | | | Quoting hal9g: Quote:
If you don't like the way the Rule is worded, then lobby Ken for a change. That's what I'm doing. I'm lobbying for allowing functional equivalents. |
| | Registered: March 13, 2007 | | Reputation: | | Posts: 6,635 |
| | Posted: | | | | I am simply arguing that the current wording of the Rules prohibits "functional equivalents", whether we like it or not.
If you get Ken to change the Rules, then we can begin a whole new set of arguments about what is and is not a "functional equivalent". That'll be fun! | | | | Hal |
| | Registered: March 13, 2007 | | Posts: 2,759 |
| | Posted: | | | | Quoting T!M: Quote:
Me too - just like I'd enter, say, a "supervising re-recording mixer". For both it could be argued that they're technically not allowed because they're not listed in the column, but that entire system is fundamentally flawed. We'll never be able to include all possible name variants in that table, while just the tiniest little bit of common sense tells you that the "senior art director" is just another label for the supervising art director, and that a "supervising re-recording mixer" shouldn't be left out either. Easy solution: support Invelos to change the rules to allow functional equivalents. |
| | Registered: March 13, 2007 | | Reputation: | | Posts: 6,635 |
| | Posted: | | | | Quoting RHo: Quote:
Quoting hal9g:
Quote:
If you don't like the way the Rule is worded, then lobby Ken for a change.
That's what I'm doing. I'm lobbying for allowing functional equivalents. Great! Let us know when you are successful. Until then, Senior AD is not permissible. | | | | Hal |
| | Registered: March 13, 2007 | | Posts: 2,759 |
| | Posted: | | | | Quoting hal9g: Quote:
Ken gave us custom categories for you to track whatever you want, so this argument is bogus. Custom credits are no solution because they are local only and everybody has to enter them himself. |
| | T!M | | Profiling since Dec. 2000 |
| Registered: March 13, 2007 | | Reputation: | | Posts: 8,722 |
| | Posted: | | | | Quoting skipnet50: Quote:
We have never been able to, and never will be able to account for EVERY possible permutation that Hollywood can create. Exactly! So there's no need to aim for that - we just need to allow for that little bit of common sense that allows us to use such minor label variations. It's my experience that the vast majority of the users understands how to deal with these credit variations perfectly. As long as the voters adopt a "is it useful to track this credit?" attitude as opposed to a "can we find a technicality to prevent correct and valid data from entering the profile?" attitude, then all should be fine. |
| | Registered: March 13, 2007 | | Posts: 2,759 |
| | Posted: | | | | Quoting skipnet50: Quote:
We have never been able to, and never will be able to account for EVERY possible permutation that Hollywood can create. We don't have to account every possible permutation, if we allow functional equivalents. |
| | Registered: March 13, 2007 | | Posts: 2,759 |
| | Posted: | | | | Quoting hal9g: Quote:
If you get Ken to change the Rules, then we can begin a whole new set of arguments about what is and is not a "functional equivalent". That'll be fun! I guess this will not be as much fun as we have now. |
| | Registered: March 13, 2007 | | Posts: 2,759 |
| | Posted: | | | | Quoting hal9g: Quote:
Quoting RHo:
Quote:
Quoting hal9g:
Quote:
If you don't like the way the Rule is worded, then lobby Ken for a change.
That's what I'm doing. I'm lobbying for allowing functional equivalents.
Great! Let us know when you are successful. Until then, Senior AD is not permissible. Correct! I'm looking forward to the day when Senior AD will be allowed as a functional equivalent. |
|
|
|
Invelos Forums->DVD Profiler: Contribution Discussion |
Page:
1 2 3 4 Previous Next
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
 |