Sorry, but the poll is currently 14-12, I don't think you'll find your definite answer here. 

Quoting Pantheon:

Quote:
Ok...I can see where eaglejd is coming from.

However, if we follow this logic then Make-up Effects Artist would also be an invalid entry - and I can see no sense in that.
If a Make-up Artist is a valid entry; then logically a Make-up Effects Artist is also valid.

For Make-up Effects, from what I have seen, most people use the same types of credits as listed in the standard Make-up section...it's what I do as well.

As to the OP, I would not enter a credit of 'Special Effects Artist'.

Quoting bigdaddyhorse:

Quote:
If there's "Visual Effects" and "Special Effects" then visual is what we are trying to track. In these cases, special turns to just pyros and stunts.

If the "special effects" end up being filmed and viewed onscreen then they are "visual effects" too, and I personally am interested in these as well.

---------------

Neill, I have an easier answer just follow the Rules. VFAs are not [b]currently[/b listed as acceptable data], therefore o listed as an acceptable role in the present tense the answer has to be no. A discussion about future inclusion is one thing and as I said on that score I am in your corner. But poll or no poll the current answer is no,

The answer was obvious after reading the Rules. Like I said a future discussion is one thing but that isn't the way the OP was framed IMO. It was framed as a poll for right now.

Quoting eaglejd:

Quote:
Quoting Pantheon:

Quote:
So what are we saying here?

If the credit includes the word Artist then it should be omitted?

Yes

Such a ruling needs to come from Ken, not you.

Quoting Winston Smith:

Quote:
Neill, I have an easier answer just follow the Rules. VFAs are not [b]currently[/b listed as acceptable data], therefore o listed as an acceptable role in the present tense the answer has to be no. A discussion about future inclusion is one thing and as I said on that score I am in your corner. But poll or no poll the current answer is no,

The answer was obvious after reading the Rules. Like I said a future discussion is one thing but that isn't the way the OP was framed IMO. It was framed as a poll for right now.

How you interpret the OP is entirely up to you. My objection is that, without clarifying the issue with me, you make an accusation that I am attempting to circumvent the rules.

I just needed to know how to proceed; and, as I have already stated I intend to omit these people in the future because (despite the poll result) there is not enough of an agreement for me to feel they should be included.

Lastly, this forum has on many occasions made decisions that affect the rules. A good example of this is ignoring the CLT results and starting threads to find out a common name.
The rules state to use the CLT results - but no one seems to have a problem ignoring that.

Likewise, the rules do NOT state that Make-up Effects Artist is a valid entry but everyone enters them.

I have no problem in following the rules (or understanding them for that matter). What I do have difficulty with is remembering all the decisions made in the forum that affect what I should be doing.

It's a Catch22 situation - when the forum decision is ignored everyone voting NO cries foul and points to some thread where a discussion took place. But, likewise, if you follow the rules exactly you get people voting NO or sending PMs reminding you of this or that decision made in the forum.

So from now on, as far as I am concerned the best thing is to ignore everyone in the forum when it comes to following the rules and just do what the the rules state.
So - to give due warning, my ONLY source of Credited As information is going to be the CLT; and if any of you vote NO on a contribution you will be ignored and I will report the NO vote to Invelos as a violation of voting rules.
Likewise anyone submitting Make-up Effects Artists will get a no votes.

Anyway, for my purposes the usefulness of this thread has expired. I know what I am doing going forward; and that is all I wanted to achieve.

To end - in future Winston I would appreciate that you not put nefarious motives on my posts.

P.S. If you can spot where I'm being facetious and throwing my toys out of the pram at the stupidity of this whole situation give yourself a gold star!

Quoting eaglejd:

Quote:
Quoting Grendell:

Quote:
Quoting eaglejd:

Quote:
Quoting Pantheon:

Quote:
So what are we saying here?

If the credit includes the word Artist then it should be omitted?

Yes

Such a ruling needs to come from Ken, not you.

Gee, I didn't realize I was setting policy, I thought I was just giving my opinion.

I thought so too, eagle. Just Grendell being Grendell

The fact you don't even understand that I was merely using the Make-up Effects section in relation to Visual Effects section to prove a point - and not suggesting that they are one and the same - just goes to show that you don't read what you see.

I was pointing out that the Make-up Effects section of the rules does NOT say Make-up Effects Artist - but that people are intelligent enough to realise that this was an omission and that these people should be included.

I was not suggesting that Make-up Effects people would be listed under Visual effects - and nowhere did I say this.

My larger point here that you seem to be conveniently ignoring is that the forum choose to sidestep the rules when they see fit; but at other times stay rigid. This is not consistent and causes a lot of confusion for contributors.

Many people do not frequent these forums (who can blame them!) and, as such, have no knowledge of 'forum decisions'. So, they follow the contribution rules as written - then they get NO votes and can't understand why; so they stop contributing.
Where's the sense in that?

Either the forum is given the power to make decisions that directly affect the rules - and the ability to then edit those rules immediately.
OR the forum has no power whatsoever and is merely a bunch of windbags blowing hot air to for the joy of listening to themselves speak.

So, which is it?

We either have to stick to the rules 100% or we have to have the ability to make changes and implement them. You can't have it both ways.

I would be quite within my rights to only use the CLT for Credited As entries but I would received NO votes (and recently have...the person linking to some buried thread regarding the actor in question).

Likewise I could vote no to any contribution adding a Make-up Effects Artist (within the MU FX section for those who are confused).

And what about all you frequent forum visitors/poster who continually add Prosthetic Make-up Effects etc to the MU FX section? Where are your voices here?

Anyway, I am done with this conversation. I only re-started uploading my profile changes a little over a week ago and, for the post part, it has been a stress-free and simple proceedure.
But everytime a situation like this arises it makes me wonder why I bother.

Contributing to our database; and as such improving this wonderful program, should be a fun thing to do; but far too many people make it a chore - and that includes Invelos themselves too; who, it seems, cannot be bothered to update the rules on a regular basis with forum decisions they have implemented.

Rant over. Bored now.