| Author |
Message |
| Registered: March 14, 2007 |  Posts: 2,366 |
| | Posted: | | | | The rules say Sound Designer credited as Sound Designer or Sound Design and not Co-Anything, yet the program says "(Sound Designer, Sound Design, Co-Sound Designer)". Which one is correct?  | | | Martin Zuidervliet
DVD Profiler Nederlands |
|
| Registered: June 12, 2007 | Reputation:  |  Posts: 2,665 |
| | Posted: | | | | Those hints within the program were never updated for v3.5.x.
I'd go with the Rules. | | | | Bad movie? You're soaking in it! |
|
| Registered: March 13, 2007 | Reputation:  | | Posts: 13,202 |
| | Posted: | | | | I agree with tweeter, however, it is hard to argue with the program hints. Just one more thing to add to Ken's 'to do' list.  | | | No dictator, no invader can hold an imprisoned population by force of arms forever.
There is no greater power in the universe than the need for freedom.
Against this power, governments and tyrants and armies cannot stand.
The Centauri learned this lesson once.
We will teach it to them again.
Though it take a thousand years, we will be free.
- Citizen G'Kar |
|
| Registered: March 14, 2007 | | Posts: 2,366 |
| | Posted: | | | | The rules for sound are of the same "age" as the program hints so one of these two must have been overlooked. | | | Martin Zuidervliet
DVD Profiler Nederlands |
|
  | T!M | | Profiling since Dec. 2000 |
| Registered: March 13, 2007 | | Reputation: | | Posts: 8,736 |
| | Posted: | | | | Quoting Unicus69: Quote:
it is hard to argue with the program It is. As it is, since "Co-Sound Designer" is specifically listed as an allowed credit in the program, I'd enter it if I encountered such a credit. I sometimes feel we're to paranoid over "co-" anyway: for instance, I've seen several films where the only sound editing credits are two people credit under a "co-supervising sound editors" header. In absence of any other sound editing credits, it's obvious that the "co-" just refers to them doing the job together. Giving the right people the proper credit for the job they performed seems preferable over listing no sound editors at all. But hey, that's just me. |
|
| Registered: March 15, 2007 | | Reputation: |  Posts: 5,459 |
| | Posted: | | | | It's always confused me too. I can understand the reasons for "additional" or "assistant", but with "co-" it never meant they were doing a less qualified job, it simply meant they were doing it with someone else. |
|
| Registered: June 12, 2007 | | Reputation: | | Posts: 2,665 |
| | Posted: | | | | Quoting T!M: Quote:
Quoting Unicus69:
Quote:
it is hard to argue with the program
It is. As it is, since "Co-Sound Designer" is specifically listed as an allowed credit in the program, I'd enter it if I encountered such a credit. While the program note cites Co-Sound Designer as allowed the Rules specifically say no Co- Anything for the Sound section. If you decide to use the program notes for Sound Design over the Rules then there are a lot of Crew roles with No notes. In those cases should only the explicit roles listed in the program be allowed to supersede the Rules? That could be argued. The two obviously contradict each other in this case. I don't think the contradiction should be used as a way to dodge Rules we may not agree with. | | | | Bad movie? You're soaking in it! |
|
| Registered: March 13, 2007 | | Posts: 21,610 |
| | Posted: | | | | I agree, tweeter. In view of the standatd that was set from Day One, Ken clearly had the hiccups, hopefully he will read this thread and rectify this issue soonest. I would not and will not use Co-Anything as long as that prohibition remains intact.
Skip | | | ASSUME NOTHING!!!!!!
CBE, MBE, MoA and proud of it.
Outta here
Billy Video |
|
| Registered: March 14, 2007 | | Posts: 2,366 |
| | Posted: | | | | The expert (StefColosi), who ones proposed the inclusing of the sound credits, said in the IVS Beta Release Testing Forum that "Co-sound design(er)" was removed and we shouldn't bother. So now it's clear to me that the program hint for that credit was just a left over from his final proposal and should have been removed. | | | Martin Zuidervliet
DVD Profiler Nederlands | | | | Last edited: by Daddy DVD |
|
| T!M | | Profiling since Dec. 2000 |
| Registered: March 13, 2007 | | Reputation: | | Posts: 8,736 |
| | Posted: | | | | Quoting northbloke: Quote:
It's always confused me too. I can understand the reasons for "additional" or "assistant", but with "co-" it never meant they were doing a less qualified job, it simply meant they were doing it with someone else. Exactly! It is, once again, the difference between collecting data just for the sake of collecting data, or actually giving the right people the proper credit for the job they performed. |
|
| Registered: March 14, 2007 | | Posts: 3,830 |
| | Posted: | | | | . | | | | Sources for one or more of the changes and/or additions were not submitted. Please include the sources for your changes in the contribution notes, especially for cast and crew additions. | | | | Last edited: by ? |
|
| Registered: March 13, 2007 | | Posts: 1,414 |
| | Posted: | | | | The specific overrules the general, when interpreting rules, so I would say that (until Ken changes it) you do not put in co-anything EXCEPT you may put in co-Sound Designers. | | | | "This movie has warped my fragile little mind." |
|
| Registered: March 13, 2007 | | Reputation: | | Posts: 2,394 |
| | Posted: | | | | I have thought the same thing about Co-Whatever just meaning that these Whatevers just shared the same role. Then I run across a title which has Co-Executive Producers AND Executive Producers. In this case, there must be some difference in hierarchy between the Co-EXPs and the EXPs. It isn't safe to assume anything, so the rule against Co-Anything makes sense. | | | Another Ken (not Ken Cole)
Badges? We ain't got no badges. We don't need no badges. I don't have to show you any stinking badges.
DVD Profiler user since June 15, 2001 |
|