Puppeteer status

The IMDb policy is to list the credits as they are presented in the movie. If you provide proof that the pupeeteer is credited as an actor, that should be no problem.

This leaves a question of what it means to be credited as an actor.

But I find that IMDb's guidelines make distinctions based on types of work, not just based based on how credits are presented in a specific credit roll.

The cast guidelines state that the section includes "people not 'acting' in the traditional sense" and continues, "If the person is in-front of the camera or providing their voice, then they are considered Cast". Sounds promising for puppeteers.

However, a few different help pages include a statement like this: "We list only acting roles in the Cast section of a film, so other types of performances need to be added under the proper data section. For example: voiceovers, looping, adr work, stand-ins, photo doubles and puppeteers belong to the Additional Crew; stunt performers and stunt doubles belong to the Stunts section, etc." (from Update Status FAQ)

@Peter_pbn​ 

> This leaves a question of what it means to be credited as an actor.

I was deliberately vague on that (but maybe I should have said "cast" rather than "actor" to make it more so).
The reason for that vagueness was that it makes the decision *per name* or *per title*, rather than *what's morally right*. IMDb reviewers and contributors already have an understanding of what makes "cast" credits and when proof is consistent with that, the answer is clear. 

IMHO the cast is usually quite clear from the credit roll, naming their role figure (although some movies don't), early in the credits and not under another section, like camera or audio. 

> I find that IMDb's guidelines make distinctions based on types of work, not just based based on how credits are presented in a specific credit roll.

True, I suppose it's because the discussions have been tedious, when fans and actors are determined to get a certain name to appear as cast. 
I may be wrong, but I'd think that if a name is clearly among the cast in the credit roll, the guideline would not prevent inclusion as cast.
"Woman passing by" could be a named role among the cast, but if not she would be a walk-on/extra and IMDb needs guidelines to decide to include it as "uncredited" or to exclude.
If stunt performance is credited among the cast, I'd submit it as cast, but I think the guidelines cover the majority of titles.

> The cast guidelines state that the section includes "people not 'acting' in the traditional sense" and continues, 
> "If the person is in-front of the camera or providing their voice, then they are considered Cast". Sounds promising for puppeteers.

I think this is mostly to widen the scope to handle uncredited or non-fictional cases and separate cast from the claims of "I'm an actor, I should be in actor section".
Maybe a better wording would be "they *may be* considered Cast", because there are plenty of exceptions listed. 
As for "in-front of the camera" I'd interpret that as "on screen". I don't know how much modern day puppeteers themselves stand in-front of the camera, but the performance is still as on-screen as any motion caption is. 
However, if not credited in the movie, the guideline probably is right to not keep it outside the cast section.

> "We list only acting roles in the Cast section of a film, so other types of performances need to be added under the proper data section. For example: voiceovers, looping, adr work, stand-ins, photo doubles and puppeteers belong to the Additional Crew; stunt performers and stunt doubles belong to the Stunts section, etc." (from Update Status FAQ)

I wasn't aware of this specific mention of puppeteers. The guidelines are inconsistent and I can't tell which is the most recent or more accurate statement. 
In general pupeteers seem to be stored under "additional crew", but I don't think the guideline prevents listing as cast if there is proof of cast credits. 

@JAG​

I'm nothing official, but happened to see this request. I understand this as an optinon of the guild Committee, but it's probably more effective to present it as a workable problem if you want change.

For context, refer to the Trautman page and Men in Black example.

https://www.imdb.com/name/nm0871209/
https://www.imdb.com/title/tt0119654/fullcredita

The credits guidelines mentions "voice" and "motion capture" cast specifically. Maybe that can help you clarify your situation.
https://help.imdb.com/article/contribution/filmography-credits/cast-acting-credits-guidelines/GH3JZC74FVYKKFMD#

If you're proposing a change to these guidelines, please propose another cast specification.

> puppeteers in IMDB are listed in the Additional Crew section of our respective Filmographies

The filmographies are merely views of the database content. The credits are added per movie and if the movie lists you as crew, your page will show crew.
There is actually no actor section, they are added as "cast". 

As a first step you could argue that there should be a "Puppet department" that moves you out of the "other crew" section. As you mentioned, the puppeteer work is often quite different from that of the actor, so having a well named section should be more descriptive than trying to make everyone cast.
To be "cast" you'll need to be a specific character in the movie. This is clearly true for voice actors. If you can show puppeteer credits for a specific character, you should have the same possibility to make cast. 

> SAG-AFTRA covers puppeteers as principal performers

Each national guild opinion is hopefully reflected in the in-movie credits of the movies made under that contract. IMDb is of course not limited to US movies.

> We request that IMDB re-characterize puppeteers as Actors and not Additional Crew, whether or not their voices are heard in the finished product.

The IMDb policy is to list the credits as they are presented in the movie. If you provide proof that the pupeeteer is credited as an actor, that should be no problem.
If, on the other hand, the actual movie credits did make a distinction you'll need to take the discussion with the movie management first. 
Consider focusing on your next contracts and appearances, rather than trying to change history.

I think it's best that IMDb doesn't try to change the credits based on general requests. You may however report errors to a specific movie, e.g. list uncredited appearances.

> The only time a puppeteer is listed as an Actor is when the puppeteer performs the voice of the character. We believe this is wrong.

Again, take that with the movie management.

> should not "demote" the performer from Actor to Additional Crew.

An IMBb listing are just words. What makes you think IMDb is an authority?
It seems as if you're the one that "demote" based on it. Why do you think "puppeteer" is something less valued than "actor"?
Is it the Actors Guild that promote the belief that being an actor is better, more wothy, than any other movie participant?

> A puppeteer, like an actor, brings a character to life on screen. 

I don't dispute that claim. I would however argue that the camera crew also fits that description. And the puppet designer and builder would be as important, right?
In an animated movie where the charaters are hand drawn or computer generated, who should be getting the "role of the actor" credit?

> Occasionally, producers will choose to replace the performer's voice in the finished product with that of another actor. 

Occationally actors are cut from movies before release. They're still actors, but are they actors in *that* movie?
The policy says "no" in general and it sounds fair to me.

If you want to motivate that on-screen puppetteering is enough to be part of cast, focus on the on-screen work that isn't cut from production.

---

Hope this helps the discussion.

The cast guidelines state that the section includes "people not 'acting' in the traditional sense" and continues, "If the person is in-front of the camera or providing their voice, then they are considered Cast". Sounds promising for puppeteers.

@Bethanny​ Thanks for your attention to this matter. I now see more than one potential solution that may work for most puppeteers (assuming their names actually appear somewhere in the credits). 

1. My original idea, which is to simply treat all credited puppeteers as cast members, and have such credits display in the Acting section of their filmographies. 
2. I have had success adding my name to the Acting section of a project by naming the Character and adding "puppeteer" in parentheses. For example, see this one listing of an episode of Unhappily Ever After, in which I listed myself as "Mr. Floppy (puppeteer)":
   https://www.imdb.com/title/tt0736923/?ref_=ttep_ep1
   The benefit of this solution is that it requires no change on the part of IMDB. Performers can go in and edit the project listing themselves. (Note: this is exactly how the credit appears on screen, so I'm not sure how it would work in other cases.)
3. Create a new attribute, much like "voice" and "motion capture," for characters. The downside of this is that attributes aren't visible on the credit when viewed on the website.

I invite my fellow puppeteers to comment on these alternate solutions and provide any other comments they see fit.

@atrautman​ 

> Performers can go in and edit the project listing themselves. 

This should be true regardless of how it's implemented. Audience, performers and production can usually contribute freely. Note however that some titles are locked (because they are considered complete) and contributions without enough "proof" provided might be rejected (regardless of what's true).

> I listed myself as "Mr. Floppy (puppeteer)": (Note: this is exactly how the credit appears on screen [...])

I see that the parentheses is currently not showing. Were they disputed? I think it makes most sense to get that part into the "attribute" instead, and it would present the parentheses.

> Create a new attribute, much like "voice" and "motion capture," for characters. 

Did you try to write "puppeteer" in the attribute field? It might work already, and then guidelines could be adapted later.
There seems to be a lot of attributes in use that are not among the ones "valid" in the guidelines.
https://help.imdb.com/article/contribution/filmography-credits/cast-acting-credits-guidelines/GH3JZC74FVYKKFMD?ref_=helpsrall#attribute

> The downside of this is that attributes aren't visible on the credit when viewed on the website.

Not sure what you mean. I can see "Bobcat Goldthwait as Mr. Floppy(voice)" both the in the title you mention and in his personal list. 
https://www.imdb.com/name/nm0001281/#actor

Maybe the "valid" attributes show, but anything not considered valid is hidden?

@JAG​ 

>attributes aren't visible on the credit when viewed on the website.

I quoted this from one of IMDB's help pages. I do see, however, the "(voice)" parenthetical, so I'm not sure what the status of this is.

>Did you try to write "puppeteer" in the attribute field?

Yes. It was not accepted.

@Bethanny​ 

I have noticed, since writing my original post, that I am able to go to the page of a project in which I am listed as Additional Crew and list myself in the cast with—for example—the credit "Mr. Floppy puppeteer," which is how I appear in the end credits of that project. This might be an acceptable solution that most puppeteers can do themselves. 

However, I am not able, in IMDBPro, to list my Profession as "puppeteer," because it's not on the list. Would it be possible for IMDB to add "puppeteer" to the list of professions? I think most puppeteers would find this a dandy way to indicate what they really do in front of the camera.

Thanks!

Allan

@atrautman​ Slight correction: as of now "(motion capture)" is not a cast attribute, it also goes to additional crew. 

@English_pedantic_grammarian​ Thanks for the thoughtful response. Just to be clear, I don't believe IMDB intends to demean the professions collected under the Additional Crew heading. But for many of us puppeteers, and I imagine professionals in other careers as well, it is not unreasonable to feel slighted nonetheless.

And, yes, I agree with you that a simple breaking-out of puppeteers as a separate profession would do the trick—even the addition of a "puppeteer" attribute would work for most of us. That's exactly the basis for my request in the original post.

@English_pedantic_grammarian​ 

Well said, indeed. I can understand, from IMDB’s fan-based POV, why they would lump so many jobs into Other Crew. What frustrates me is that they use the same database for IMDBPro, which is used as a de facto resume by professionals looking to hire. And of course Other Crew is not helpful in that regard. Oh, well…