Please Fix How Editorial Credits Are Listed

  • 2
  • Problem
  • Updated 6 years ago
  • Not a Problem
Considering how the editorial department works, it makes no sense why Editorial Department credits would be listed ABOVE Editor credits. Editor is the top level of the editorial department, and it does a disservice to editors wanting to display their editor credits.
Photo of F. Capricorn

F. Capricorn

  • 4 Posts
  • 0 Reply Likes

Posted 6 years ago

  • 2
Photo of Giancarlo Cairella

Giancarlo Cairella, Official Rep

  • 1108 Posts
  • 1042 Reply Likes
Editor credits are already listed before the Editorial Department credit on title pages. See for example:

http://www.imdb.com/title/tt0133093/f...

Zach Staenberg's editor credit on the page is displayed right after the cinematographer's. The Editorial Department section is listed further down the page, right after the Costume/Wardrobe section. This placement is hardcoded so it doesn't change from title to title.

If you were referring to the placement of credits within the Editorial Department section itself, they are listed in alphabetical order (by last name, not by profession). This means that sometimes an apprentice editor may be listed within that section before a first assistant editor, depending on their last name. Unfortunately, there is no way to change the order of credits within individual department sections (with the exception of Writers) -- they are automatically displayed in alphabetical order.

However, if you were referring to the display of these categories on an individual filmography page, they are ordered by the number of credits in each category. So, for example, Mr. Steinberg's page at http://www.imdb.com/name/nm0821205/ shows his Editor credits before his Editorial Department credits because he has more credits in the first category than in the second. But someone who has only 2 credits as an editor and 12 as an assistant editor would have Editorial Department credits listed first on his page.

If this is not what you were referring to, please give me more details/an example so I can see what you meant.
Photo of F. Capricorn

F. Capricorn

  • 4 Posts
  • 0 Reply Likes
Use this as an example of what I'm talking about:

http://www.imdb.com/name/nm0711235/?r...

Fred Raskin edited the Oscar Best Picture nominated Django Unchained, but if you look at his page, it looks like he's just an assistant editor. His major credits are buried.

This is because, rightly, you separate Editor from Editorial Department. The problem with this system is that based on your system of putting the category with the most credits first, it puts the more major credit further down the page. I understand the logic behind organizing pages this way, but when it comes to top level credits (which I'm defining as any credit that would be in the opening credits of a modern movie) does it not make more sense to always have those at the top?

How many movies will Ben Affleck have to direct before he is listed as a director first?

I don't have Mr. Raskin's or Mr. Affleck's credits, so my IMDb page makes it look like I'm still an assistant. I understand this is a free service, and you guys have a way you like to do things. Like many others, I'm using your service just to stay employed. I just don't think organizing credits this way makes any sense.

Is there a way I can recommend a change to the site's designers?
Photo of F. Capricorn

F. Capricorn

  • 4 Posts
  • 0 Reply Likes
Sorry, my finger slipped and hit send before I had a chance to say thank you, Giancarlo.
Photo of Emperor

Emperor, Champion

  • 6418 Posts
  • 3004 Reply Likes
The reason for that is that the categories are sorted by the number of credits the person has in that category.
Photo of F. Capricorn

F. Capricorn

  • 4 Posts
  • 0 Reply Likes
Yes, Emperor, I got that from the other response.

Is there someone at IMDb I can contact about changing that? The system does not make sense for all credits.
Photo of Emperor

Emperor, Champion

  • 6418 Posts
  • 3004 Reply Likes
The only thing you could do is start a new suggestion thread, perhaps suggesting that they order roles by some kind of weighting: director, actor, etc. but even then it might be tricky - some actor/directors are directors first and foremost (like Tarantino, who has actor ranking higher thanks to his cameos) and some are actors first, while others transition between the two. So the weighting would not only be subjective and would vary from person to person. Tricky, but it'd be a move in the right direction at least.

This conversation is no longer open for comments or replies.