| Author |
Message |
| Registered: March 13, 2007 | Reputation:  | | Posts: 2,372 |
| | Posted: | | | | The rules state: Quote:
If puppeteers are included in the end credits include them and append (puppeteer) at the end of the role. However, now that these are sometimes dealt with by using a divider I think it needs to be at least clarified by Ken that he still wants this. Here is what one submission currently looks like:  As you see the role was Puppeteer and each credit was correctly appended with (puppeteer). Now, there is no "role" and it just doesn't seem right to me. The votes go both ways, some yes and some no. Just wondering what the general consensus is and if we should discuss it in the rules forum. Of course as I said a quick pop-in from Ken would help clarify everything  |
|
| Registered: July 31, 2008 | | Reputation: |  Posts: 2,506 |
| | Posted: | | | | I personally would leave them in until we (hopefully) get a tick box similar to Voice Only credits. |
|
  | Corne | | Registered: Nov. 1, 2000 |
| Registered: April 5, 2007 |  Posts: 1,059 |
| | Posted: | | | | Quoting Forget_the_Rest: Quote:
I personally would leave them in until we (hopefully) get a tick box similar to Voice Only credits. Same here, besides the rule to append (puppeteer) at the end of the role still stands. | | | | Cor |
|
| Registered: June 12, 2007 | | Reputation: |  Posts: 2,665 |
| | Posted: | | | | Quoting Forget_the_Rest: Quote:
I personally would leave them in until we (hopefully) get a tick box similar to Voice Only credits. I'm the submitter and this is exactly why i left it in. It's for that time in the future (after the iPhone app i hope) when we get a version that can auto-convert and strip these from the end of the Role field and apply them to their own check box. To do otherwise would imply any group (or empty) role could not be a puppeteer which i don't believe was the intent of the Rule. | | | | Bad movie? You're soaking in it! | | | | Last edited: by tweeter |
|
| Registered: September 29, 2008 | Reputation:  | | Posts: 2,547 |
| | Posted: | | | | If they're under the Puppeteer group divider, then whey would you need the "as puppeteer" also? Isn't that covered by the Group Divider?
Eric | | | My one wish for the DVD Profiler online database: Ban or remove the disc-level profiles of TV season sets. It completely screws up/inflates the CLT.
FACT: Imdb is WRONG 70% of the time! Misspelled cast, incomplete cast, wrong cast/crew roles. So for those who want DVD Profiler to be "as perfect as Imdb", good luck with that.
Stop adding UNIT crew! They're invalid credits. Stop it! |
|
| Registered: June 12, 2007 | | Reputation: | | Posts: 2,665 |
| | Posted: | | | | Quoting huskersports: Quote:
If they're under the Puppeteer group divider, then whey would you need the "as puppeteer" also? Isn't that covered by the Group Divider?
Eric Turn it around. Each of them used to have a Role (with no divider) that looked like: Quote:
Puppeteer (puppeteer) and now it is a group Role with each individual retaining: Quote:
(puppeteer) What if we didn't have a (voice) check box and were told by the Rules to append (voice) to the Role in anticipation of a voice check box in the future. Would we remove that from a group of credits if the Role was rolled up into a Group Role? I'm honestly not sure (and this isn't directed at you huskersports but more widely) why it troubles people to have a Group Role and a tag directed at future development when for years the two were side-by-side " Puppeteer (puppeteer)" and no one complained. The previous Role followed the Rules then, the new one follows the Rules as they stand now. | | | | Bad movie? You're soaking in it! |
|
| Registered: September 29, 2008 | | Reputation: | | Posts: 2,547 |
| | Posted: | | | | That's exactly what I wanted to know. Tank ya!
Eric | | | My one wish for the DVD Profiler online database: Ban or remove the disc-level profiles of TV season sets. It completely screws up/inflates the CLT.
FACT: Imdb is WRONG 70% of the time! Misspelled cast, incomplete cast, wrong cast/crew roles. So for those who want DVD Profiler to be "as perfect as Imdb", good luck with that.
Stop adding UNIT crew! They're invalid credits. Stop it! |
|
| T!M | | Profiling since Dec. 2000 |
| Registered: March 13, 2007 | | Reputation: | | Posts: 8,732 |
| | Posted: | | | | Quoting tweeter: Quote:
when for years the two were side-by-side "Puppeteer (puppeteer)" and no one complained. For the record: I've never seen that. Not once. Had I seen it, I would have complained about it.  Additionally: when did Invelos ever declare "(puppeteer)" to be "a tag directed at future development"? | | | | Last edited: by T!M |
|
| Corne | | Registered: Nov. 1, 2000 |
| Registered: April 5, 2007 | | Posts: 1,059 |
| | Posted: | | | | Quoting T!M: Quote:
Quoting tweeter:
Quote:
when for years the two were side-by-side "Puppeteer (puppeteer)" and no one complained.
For the record: I've never seen that. Not once. Had I seen it, I would have complained about it. Actually I have seen it a lot and it isn't any different than a voice credit, for example Actor X Y as Voice of [...] (voice). | | | | Cor | | | | Last edited: by Corne |
|
| Registered: March 29, 2007 | Reputation:  | | Posts: 2,741 |
| | Posted: | | | | Personally, I'm for removing the role when there is a group divider, like the divider rule says. | | | | Marty - Registered July 10, 2004, User since 2002. |
|
| Corne | | Registered: Nov. 1, 2000 |
| Registered: April 5, 2007 | | Posts: 1,059 |
| | Posted: | | | | Quoting mreeder50: Quote:
Personally, I'm for removing the role when there is a group divider, like the divider rule says. I could be misreading this rule, but I can't find a note saying not to add individual roles in groups? | | | | Cor |
|
| T!M | | Profiling since Dec. 2000 |
| Registered: March 13, 2007 | | Reputation: | | Posts: 8,732 |
| | Posted: | | | | Quoting Forget_the_Rest: Quote:
I personally would leave them in until we (hopefully) get a tick box similar to Voice Only credits. What would that change? As far as I can see, the contribution would still look exactly the same. |
|
| Corne | | Registered: Nov. 1, 2000 |
| Registered: April 5, 2007 | | Posts: 1,059 |
| | Posted: | | | | Quoting T!M: Quote:
Quoting Forget_the_Rest:
Quote:
I personally would leave them in until we (hopefully) get a tick box similar to Voice Only credits.
What would that change? As far as I can see, the contribution would still look exactly the same. When a tick box gets implemented the (puppeteer) credits will be converted automatically. | | | | Cor |
|
| T!M | | Profiling since Dec. 2000 |
| Registered: March 13, 2007 | | Reputation: | | Posts: 8,732 |
| | Posted: | | | | Quoting Corne: Quote:
When a tick box gets implemented the (puppeteer) credits will be converted automatically. Has there really ever been any indication from Invelos that this may happen at some point? I don't recall, but if so, then why wasn't this feature implemented in 3.6? Additionally, even with a checkbox, the example as presented by lyonsden5 would still look exactly the same - and just like in the current situation, voters would probably still not agree on whether to vote "yes" or "no". | | | | Last edited: by T!M |
|
| Registered: March 29, 2007 | | Reputation: | | Posts: 2,741 |
| | Posted: | | | | Quoting Corne: Quote:
Quoting mreeder50:
Quote:
Personally, I'm for removing the role when there is a group divider, like the divider rule says.
I could be misreading this rule, but I can't find a note saying not to add individual roles in groups? Here are the rules that apply: Use Group dividers to designate cast grouped in the credits such as "Soldiers" or "Additional Cast". Also use Group dividers for crew teams. So, whether the puppeteers, or for that matter any groups, appear with the cast or crew, you remove the roles and use the group divider(s). Without Invelos clarification, that's my take on it. If that's not correct, I will stop contributing the ones with dividers and keep them local. | | | | Marty - Registered July 10, 2004, User since 2002. |
|
| Corne | | Registered: Nov. 1, 2000 |
| Registered: April 5, 2007 | | Posts: 1,059 |
| | Posted: | | | | Quoting T!M: Quote:
Quoting Corne:
Quote:
When a tick box gets implemented the (puppeteer) credits will be converted automatically.
Has there really ever been any indication from Invelos that this may happen at some point? I don't recall, but if so, then why wasn't this feature implemented in 3.6?
That's a question mark for me too. But what's the use for appending (puppeteer) when it doesn't get a tick box? | | | | Cor |
|