.

It's a fair question.

Make-up Artist includes Make-up Designer
Make-up Effects includes Special Make-up Effects [by]

And the credit in question (Special Make-up Designer) consists of parts of both but contains neither of the words Artist or Effects.

Without more info i'd vote for Make-up Artist

.

Another example that an exhaustive list of allowed crew roles does not work very well.

Quoting Giga Wizard:

Quote:
@RHo
What are you on to? Special Make-up Designer has no exhaustive list of allowed crew roles.
Make-up Effects

Make-up Effects,

Special Make-up Effects [by]

The rules tell us to only enter those roles which are listed in the film credits exactly with the same name as listed in the rules. No exceptions are allowed by the rules and a lot of people have supported this way in the past.

I am not one of them. I think that this rule is doomed to fail and actually has already failed as we can see that a lot of people have entered role name variants which are not listed in the rules. And I am talking about the same people here which actively support the "exactly as listed" rule in the first place.

With "Special Make-Up Designer" we see just another example of a role name which, I guess, most people would agree to enter as "Make-up Artist". But it is not allowed by the rules. Of course we could ask Invelos to add it to the list but the list will never be complete.

I'd like to allow to enter a credit as long as the credit is for the same function as the role name in the rules no matter what the actual role name in the film really is.

Quoting goblinsdoitall:

Quote:
Quoting RHo:

Quote:
I'd like to allow to enter a credit as long as the credit is for the same function as the role name in the rules no matter what the actual role name in the film really is.

There are two minor points against your idea:
1. There are a lot of similar names for totally different crew jobs. For an inexperienced contributor an "Editor" might be an "Editor" no matter matter if he edits the movie or just the sound. So at least a guideline which editor should be put where is needed.

Film editor and sound editor are completely different functions. In my system they would not be allowed to be mixed because my rule definition would be by function, not by similar name.

Quote:

2. With this you open the gates for a "First Assistant Director" to be entered as "Director". Hey he was directing too!

Again, completely different functions, therefore no mix up.

Quote:

<<EDIT: I grant you, that this is not what you intend to happen, but I'm quite sure that this is exactly what is going to happen. END OF EDIT>>

Why? The role would be defined by function , not by label.

Quote:

Whether you like it or not, the rule gives security that trash data can be kept out

What security? The same people who argue with "not as credited" in some cases, enter slight variations in other cases.

And BTW we already have the crew by function system for foreign language credits, where we have to chose ourselves what is a direct translation. This is usually done by function and not by label. And crew lists of foreign language films work at least as good for profiler in my experience than English credits, where we often have a fight in the forum.

Quote:
and if, as in the case of the original post, a crew-job might be missing, you can always enter it for your local database as "Custom Crew".
I really had hoped that with the "Custom Crew" and the corrected rules the discussions on what to contribute would die away... But in vain.

Custom crew, as implemented now, is only useful for those who do full crew audits on all of their profiles. Because when you enter a custom crew member, you lose the ability to update the crew list without overwriting your custom crew.

Quoting goblinsdoitall:

Quote:
And how exactly are you planning to ensure this? How would you describe the function without using the (or "a") name of the function?.

Of course we can use the name of the function in the notes field. But we would not have to list all role name variants.

The table in the credits would be mostly the same as now, including the role column, the credited as column and incorrect roles column. Except every row would have something in the notes column. This note could be similar to the notes we see today, but it could also be something simple as "the guy who has directed the film" for director. The main difference to today's rule would be that the following paragraph:

Quote:
Group names of crew members together within each role available and list in exactly the same order credited. The table below gives each of the crew roles available within DVD Profiler. For each category, include only those people credited with the roles listed in the "Role" and "Credited As" columns. If someone is not credited with one of these roles (or direct translations of these roles), do not include them in the Crew section.

would be replaced by something stating that, when the role name is not listed in the table, you should find the appropriate label by the function described in the notes column. Actually it would be the same as we deal with foreign language credits today.

Quote:

Sorry, but the only way that your system would work, was if we had free roles, as with the actors.
This would mean that you can't sort on crew roles anymore, but is this really necessary?

No, I am not talking about an open credit system at all.

Quoting goblinsdoitall:

Quote:
Quoting RHo:

Quote:

[...] would be replaced by something stating that, when the role name is not listed in the table, you should find the appropriate label by the function described in the notes column. [...]

But we have this already, it's called "Other" and is integrated into every Crew-section, the only problem is, that "Other" isn't contributable (yet).

I see you don't understand. I don't want more roles in profiler. Actually I'd prefer less.