Template talk:Film crew

Ordering

Currently all of the jobs are in alphabetic order, arranging them into categories might be a better way to go. For example: editing, guys in charge, crewmen, actors. I'm not sure where all of the jobs would fall though.

Also, the tv crew is closely related but not the same. I debated making them one template but decided against it. Here's a list of everything I gathered.

TV Show runner Script editor Television director Television producer

Film Production designer Film director Film producer Script supervisor [[Line Producer

both Actor Cinematographer Camera operator Best boy Colorist Costume design Art director Set decorator Dolly grip Focus puller Executive producer Gaffer Grip (job) Key grip Property master Location manager Production assistant Assistant director Clapper loader Production sound mixer Boom operator (media) Utility sound technician Film editing Foley artist Dialogue editor Sound design Sound editor

Vicarious 02:09, 6 March 2006 (UTC)[reply]

I agree with all of the above. --GHcool 15:26, 7 August 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Accidents in filmaking??

Why is Accidents in filmaking (List of film accidents) listed in this template? That is not a "job" on a film crew.

I'm removing it. - ¢Spender1983 (talk) 15:50, 18 August 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Expert input

As an individual who worked for several years as a 1st AC and as a member of IATSE Local 600 I'd say I am an expert on the subject. My personal feature film creds, not including low-budget, commercial, and other projects as IMDb only lists major films and television shows for the most part Here's some recommendations on how I'd suggest improving this template..

What is the reasoning for not including television crew? Independent crewmen can often be found working on indie films, big budget features, syndicated television, music videos, commercials, etc.. The positions are the same regardless of the medium in which the project will be displayed. And its not unheard off that some projects exist across several mediums simultaneously or during the projects lifetime. While it can be argued that a few positions may be exclusive for the specific medium, be it film or tv; so can be said for big-budget vs indie film. I think the best thing to do would be to consider it a list of oproduction positions rather than exclusively film positions because the lines are far to gray to ever accurately limit it to only film positions and then the question arrises of the size of the production

For example, the list you have created.. You've listed production designers, script supervisors, and line producers as exclusive to film but television has these positions as well.

There are many positions that seem to be listed by multiple names and Assistant director article should really be split between 1st AD and 2nd AD because the positions are very different from each other. There are also a plethora of positions that do not even have articles on Wikipedia yet; most prominently in the fields of SPX, post-production, and production department which currently does not mention positons such as safety, crafty, transpo to name a few.David Condrey ^{log talk} 08:33, 21 October 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Here are some useful resources to help improve this list

As far as organizing, I'd recommend organizing the list in the same fashion in which it would be structured in the credit role on screen. I started this by separating above the line and below the line. David Condrey ^{log talk} 08:54, 21 October 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Need for reassessment of "above" and "below"

This template in its current form is contradictory in deciding who is above-the-line and below-the-line. As the article about the Unit production manager says, it is a "below-the-line staff position". And as the article about below-the-line says, the director of photography is also "part of the below-the-line film crew". So if you go by the original definition from the early studio days, both these should be below-the-line.

But on the other hand, there is a good case to be made for the director of photography to be above-the-line, since that in its more modern definition refers to "individuals who guide and influence the creative direction, process, and voice of a given narrative in a film and related expenditures." In other words, individuals who are the primary creative collaborators on a film. By that definition, the unit production manager would still be below-the-line, but the director of photography is above-the-line – and so is the film editor, another essential creative collaborator in the film crew.

So this is my suggestion: Switch the unit production manager to below-the-line, and film editor to above-the-line. Greetings from --Sprachraum (talk) 12:29, 14 April 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Special effects as a branch of produciton design

Isn't special effects a branch of production design, since it appears IN the shot (like dressing, make, hair, props, set decoration, scene design, matte painting and illustration)? — Preceding unsigned comment added by Ogat (talk • contribs) 05:38, 6 July 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Collapsed sections

This template is enigmatic to a reader unfamiliar with the terms of art "above the line" and "below the line", they either have to click through to the above/below article, or pick one section or the other at random to open to get some idea. Not great for quick navigation, and not much space is being saved when the "above the line" section is only a handful of items anyway.

Is there a reason not to make it a single table like this? I applied that edit myself then backtracked when I saw the documentation mentioning how the template should be called. --Lord Belbury (talk) 17:46, 6 December 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Yeah I agree. By default, the navbox will be expanded, but without an above or below passed in, the thing will only show the collapsed sections. It would make more sense to show everything. SWinxy (talk) 21:06, 19 March 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Creative consultant

I've noticed that Creative consultant is missing from this navigation template. Is this intentional or should it be added? If so, whereabouts? SleepDeprivedGinger (talk) 19:54, 9 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]