Quoting Unicus69:

Quote:
(...) we all know that the rules do not work well in this regard. (...)

So, I guess that you would support to change the rules in this regard?

Quoting Unicus69:

Quote:
I also have to add that I don't recall this happening under the old rule, which was far more restrictive. 

If you mean the "credits to include" column, then that was not restrictive but simply impossible and wrong. Now the rules have been clarified that the role names have to be taken literally. In order to support that some valid entries in the notes column have been removed.

The new rules make it absolutely clear that role names such as "Location Sound Recordist", "Dubbing Editor", "Based on", "Photographed in Techicolor" have not to be included for contribution.

IMO on the other hand, I guess, that most people would look at those credits as functional equivalents to "Production Sound Mixer", "Sound Editor", "Original Material by", and "Cinematographer" and would be happy to include them.

Therefore I'd advocate this rule change whenever somebody asks to include a credit which is not listed in the rules but most people would allow, if they could.

Quoting RHo:

Quote:
Quoting mdnitoil:

Quote:
Of course I work under the theory that if we weren't meant to think, we wouldn't have been issued a brain.

My thinking made me conclude that the rules as written today should be changed to allow functional equivalents because this is what people want when they ask for "based on", "developed by", "dubbing mixer" and similar credits. Of course this would include "photographed in Technicolor by".

Of corse that is called a Custom Credit, which i am using quite a bit these days. Try it...you might like it.

Skip