Introducing: New Credit Categories and Professions

Personally I can't replicate this since the error only seems to appear when the language is listed as the first language.

Perhaps you could post links to the titles and screenshots.

@Peter_pbn​   

thats the error i get.

Hi aclarada-

In order for our staff to review, can you post the link of the name page you are referring to above?

Cheers!

Hi Maya!

Here's the link

https://www.imdb.com/es/name/nm13585074/?ref_=fn_t_1

Thank you

@aclarada​ - Thank you! I've forwarded this information to the appropriate team for further investigation (Ref Ticket #V2267309487). We'll reply once we receive further information. Thank you for your patience.

@aclarada​ - Circling back, this is working as intended. The reason why the Legal Department section remains collapsed is because the credits that expand by default are the name's primary professions. On your page, your professions which are displayed below your name are Additional Crew, Production Department, and Production Manager.

If you would like for Legal Department to display as such (expand), you will need to manage your professions. However, please know that in order to change this you will need to have an IMDbPro Premium Subscription and a Claim on your page.

For further detailed information on Managing your Professions, you are welcome to review our following Help Guide.

@Maya​ 

Why would those be the primary professions if the professions have not been set by a subscriber?

Especially Additional Crew when there are no such credits on the page.

I think it might be part of the issue discussed here:

https://community-imdb.sprinklr.com/conversations/imdbcom/introducing-new-credit-categories-and-professions/690a2e48297bb2308a6501e9?commentId=6a0796029e11986e96f6e46b

Hi, @titosincity​ 

You're formatting the credit incorrectly. Options like additional photography, reshoots, second unit, Mr. Spielberg..., are not attributes, but modifiers. They must be entered after the role in that same box, preceded by a colon.

The permitted attributes are few and are reserved for specific situations. And it doesn't just affect the Finance department, but all sections of IMDb, although some departments (cast, producers...) have their own individual options.

Hope it helps!

It worked! :)

I remembered if any text was added to an existing role then IMDb asked if you wanted to create a new position, but maybe it was useless for anyone else... Anyway, it seems they changed it and it's easier now.

Thank you very much ljdoncel!

Best,

Absolutely should be a separate department

Thank you for raising this. We have passed it on to the team to look into and will get back to you here as soon as possible.

Thanks Dylan. 

I have just noticed that all my Key Nurse jobs are listed under Additional crew, if my jobs could all be merged under one heading that would be great.

(sorry for the rant!)

Any update on medical as I note some other departments have had changes? 

@deathedit​ Thanks for the feedback. The credits were moved as part of an on-going consistency clean-up process.  This is because the guide at https://help.imdb.com/article/contribution/filmography-credits/crew-credit-guidelines/GNHXXUGBUDKEUUMJ#editor specifically states:

Other editing roles (such as additional editors, assistant editors, on-line editors or supervising editors) should be submitted to the Editorial Department section.

It sounds like you are making a case to have the guide updated to better reflect the reality of the role? If so, would it be okay to contact you by email (we will use the address at which you registered with Sprinklr) to discuss the details and also whether other roles should be moved (in either direction to/from the individual vs. department list).   

Yes, please email me, I'm happy to discuss this further.

thanks!

@deathedit​  Thanks.  We have just emailed you about this. 

@Col_Needham​ Can you do the same for visual effects editors, please? There are two types of visual effects editors with very different types of jobs. One is for the production itself (we work along side the main picture editor and the director in the Editorial Department, etc), and the other works for the vendors we hire to do the visual effects for our films and shows.

My name is Rob Kraut, I'm on the Board of Directors as an elected representative for VFX Editors with IATSE Local 700, the Motion Picture Editors Guild. I'm happy to speak with you personally about this so we can get it corrected, if needs be. These listings being moved into the VFX Department is incorrect and is having a negative impact on how credits are displayed. I wouldn't even qualify for my position if I was a part of the VFX Department.

As I mentioned above in another comment, there should be two entries:
visual effect editor > Editorial Department (a part of the actual post editorial crew)
visual effect editor (vendor) > VFX Department (vendor side, and not a part of the crew)

These are two distinctly different positions with different responsibilities. Please let me know if you need more information. I can send many other people your way to verify if you'd like.

Thanks!

@MAthePA​ Actually no, this is incorrect. VFX Supervisors and VFX Directors (have never seen one of these on my shows...curious...) would not belong in the Editorial Department. They are part of the VFX Department. So that seems correct to me. Where else would they go?

Keeping on topic: VFX Editors have been around in the Editorial Department for at least 40 years, not so much on the other side. We are editors working directly with the picture editor, director/show runner (etc) and post production team in editorial. VFX Editors at the vendor are not a part of the production team making the creative decisions about the project. And hopefully this doesn't read like disrespect, because it's not. They are vital to the operation of the VFX vendors as well. Just distinctly different positions. I'm proposing IMDb fix this by have two different types of VFX Editors. One for each category.

The bigger problem is they keep removing credits from the proper Editorial Department for production side VFX Editors. If they didn't reject the corrections we've been giving them, I wouldn't be making this request.

EDIT: fixin' typos because I really need to be asleep now. 😅 

@DasKraut37​ Thanks for the added context (and please note that only posts tagged with "Employee" like this one are from IMDb employees).  We will discuss with the relevant team, but this does not look contentious given your position in the industry,  so it will simply be a case of updating the guides and moving the bare "VFX editor" credits over to the editorial department. 

@Col_Needham​ 

I'm also very interested in what @DasKraut37 is saying. I've been emailing Support about this matter as well. I just submitted I believe 18 corrections for my visual effects credits to move back into Editorial because they were erroneously put into the visual effects department. They were all rejected and the email Support people were not very... supportive.

As he mentioned, we are not in the visual effects department. 

@Col_Needham​ thanks for replying and looking into this. I'm incredibly grateful. If there's ever anything I can do to help IMDb be as accurate as possible when reflecting the positions of folks (mainly in post production) and how they appear here, I'd be more than happy to help in any way I can. Please don't hesitate to reach out. (I'm new to the forum here, not sure if it has a way for you to PM me, but we can figure it out if needs be.)

@Col_Needham​ 

Here are the confirmation numbers to my own VFX Editor updates I made which were rejected:

Contribution Confirmation
#260715-015154-032319
#260715-015115-592819
#260715-015037-592819
#260715-014952-346919
#260715-014907-119519
#260715-014827-204919
#260715-014745-621019
#260715-014640-408719
#260715-014558-743719
#260715-014518-529119
#260715-014427-948119
#260715-014345-085519
#260715-014300-646319
#260715-014147-494719
#260715-014010-138319
#260715-013613-958419
#260715-013511-641519
#260715-013353-416119

Thanks

Kim

@KimHuston​ Thanks.  No need to supply any contribution references here as we will move all affected credits for all names to the editorial department once we have confirmation that the policy and guides will be updated. 

@DasKraut37​  We have confirmation that we will move the plain "VFX editor" credits over to the editorial department as your requested, whilst retaining the "VFX editor: <vendor>" credits in the visual effects department.  We will update the contirbution guides over the coming days.  Once the updated guides are live, we just have to wait for the other bulk move operation (editorial -> editors) as mentioned elsewhere in this thread to complete.  The ETA to start moving the VFX editor credits will be around 8 August and it will take a few days.  

Thanks for your patience in the meantime. 

@deathedit​ Just to give a public update here ... 

We have worked with @deathedit on several changes to the policy on where certain credits belong between "editor" and "editorial department". 

We will be updating the guides shortly to reflect the new policy changes, including listing "supervising editor" in the main editors section.  We are around 40% of the way through these moves and expect them to complete around 7-8 August.  

@Col_Needham​ thanks! Much appreciated. This will help us a lot. So, thank you.

Now, since my credits are "visual effects editor" and not "VFX Editor" will those be adjusted as well? Or do I need to change my credit wording?

@KimHuston​ No need to worry, both forms will be moved. 

@Col_Needham​ I just wanted to follow up here and thank you for addressing this concern. Really appreciate you jumping in and taking over here. If there's any other editorial information you would like, I can get you any official specifics you may require.

Hope you have a great week!

Yes, IMDb are moving some credits including supervising editor. Not clear whether off-line editor would be affected.

https://community-imdb.sprinklr.com/conversations/imdbcom/introducing-new-credit-categories-and-professions/690a2e48297bb2308a6501e9?commentId=6a57ccdb43a02739e559b15c&replyId=6a69f27a4a49ebabfcf59c2d

Furthermore, the same anime also lists "Audrey Drake Rigg" and "Macy Anne Johnson" in the script credits; both names appear to belong to Americans involved in voice acting rather than the original script.

This is the most common problem for all animations dubbed into English for American release. They just spam all the voice credits into the main data sections which are intended for the original (Japanese in this particular case) release only.

@DuraNext,

I wonder there is no word from you that the main cast is also spammed with the dubbing (American English) credits.

@MAthePA​ yeah, but the cast ones I know that should be on "voice actor -dub" instead of cast. The producer and writer ones I really don't know how to proceed.

Leave there? Move to another category? Delete?

You know, IMDb team (employees) is working now on massive transfer of credits between departments after a major policy update. However, they say nothing about a possible placement of the dubbing producers, directors, editors, translators and so on, and so forth in the nearest future.

Before the update, only the dubbing cast and only for English language were allowed in the cast section with proper attributes. That means all the rest (other languages, other jobs/roles, and English dubbing without a proper attribute) has been just illegal spam. One can simply delete a spam with no hesitation, others can try to move the factual data to a legal place (Other Works section on name pages, or Alternative Versions section on title pages).

For me all factual data is a precious thing that should be preserved. For some time I was trying to move the spam to proper places, but from my experience, the spammers just become more confident they do a right thing and proceed the same with more efforts. Moreover, now IMDb accepts no moving if you provided no strong evidence that the person deserves the credit. So they just moved the obligation from the initial contributor onto the submitter who tries to make existing things correct according to the IMDb rules. Thanks a lot. Now I just delete or just touch not.

What frustrates me the most about this (besides regurgitating decades of verified work) is all IMDB had to do was give 'original cast and crew' priority to the top of their respective pages. Sites with way less budget easily and clearly do this AND still allow you (with one click) to see casts in multiple languages. Also why are english dubbing cast and crew being disparaged for wanting their work to be properly credited on an >English Website<

Personally, I thought the change on IMDb was great. Not only does it make it easier to distinguish the original cast from a dubbed cast, but it also allows for the addition of voice actors from various other languages (and hopefully more in the future) beyond just English-language voice actors.

You mention the website being in English, but IMDb is a global platform, featuring translations into other languages ​​and integration with Amazon Prime. You probably can't imagine how much better it is, for someone living in a non-English-speaking country, to be able to see the original cast distinguished from a dubbed cast I’ll never actually hear, and to see the voice actors who defined my childhood properly credited, whereas before, they weren't even allowed to be listed.

@VanBarrJr,

The English dubbing cast was never "disparaged", their work was allowed to be credited in the original cast section with proper attributes. But this privilege is being trespassed by those who contributed tons of American English dubbing cast into original cast (usually Japan animations) without proper attributes and often without original cast at all. So the American actors appeared as those who created the original movies, that is false information.

The last IMDb update is great to solve the problem, but the Team has done and doing this, as always, in their own freaky way spitting the IMDb contributors out of the process. Instead of letting contributors a simple transfer of credits between the correspondent departments, they provided a "huge" improvement of submission form to move the credits one by one only, processing under obligation to provide strong evidence as if the credit is added at first. The same applies when processing without the mentioned "improvement". How this all is been developing for several months? The employees, without restrictions, become the top contributors auto-pushing the plenties of credits between departments. When some credits are formally questionable, they are left in place; as a result, you can see some titles as bitten apples waiting for common contributors to collect and re-organize the pieces one by one from the table. But a common contributor with responsible attitude needs mostly the same time spent to check a title page if all the credits are correct or only a couple of them incorrect -- the work which acknowledgement is been previously stolen without a strict proof-providing.

@MAthePA​ 

As someone who contributes a lot to anime pages, I actually think the "move" tool is good. Does it have the issue of only moving one credit at a time? Yes. But it’s faster for movies or single episodes.

For moving multiple episodes, you can still add them to the correct location first and then delete them from the incorrect ones; the tool hasn't made the old way of doing things impossible.

That said, it is an improvement, but it would be great if it allowed moving more than one credit at a time, that would cut the workload for making corrections in half.

@DuraNext,

I believe you mean multiple credits, not "episodes". And yes, it's been previously said that we still can process without the mentioned "improvement". But summarizing, the new "Move category" in submission form helps only when moving one credit. This is so miserable when such major update of the policy is made initiating very massive (not one by one) transfers between departments.

@MAthePA​  I've been using this site for at least 5 years now, there already was an attribute system in place, they just never bothered to sort it properly. For example each approved credit was simply labeled voice: English version. And if the submitter wasn't doing it correctly it would flag it immediately. Both before as well as today, if you click on a show, to add a credit on the cast and crew page, it specifies the original cast only-- notice how IMDB already does this behind the curtain, so why does it not do that, when casually browsing the site? But that just goes back to my original point. All IMDB had to do was give 'original cast and crew' priority to the top of their respective pages. 

And of course add multiple languages, it baffles me this was not allowed in the first place! Why can I find sites with way less budget who easily and clearly do this. This site has, for some reason, literally become peoples resumes, it should be the gold standard. So why is this all put on the end user - you- as volunteers, to sort through the mess?

@paul_branham​ This is a known issue, thanks. There’s an update at https://community-imdb.sprinklr.com/conversations/imdbcom/introducing-new-credit-categories-and-professions/690a2e48297bb2308a6501e9?commentId=6a613ef3776246d47490018c&replyId=6a79c4f4776246d4746fca0b with the wider context in the replies above that.