Category talk:Production staff

Original creation discussion
provisions: I haven't really figured out whether this should be strictly a supercategory and contain only other categories -- or whether it should contain articles.

Should people who arent directors, writers or performers have their own subcategory to be contained in, for art staff for example or should articles like Rick Sternbach just be contained in this parent category? -- Captain Mike K. Barteltalk 16:25, 11 May 2005 (UTC)

Production staff subs
I think we should branch off Category:Production staff into further sub-categories. We already have Category:Composers, Category:Directors, Category:ILM production staff, and Category:Writers; I think we should also have Category:Cinematographers, "Category:Editors" (for film and assistant film editors only), Category:Producers, and Category:Designers (for production, set and costume designers). Another good one to have would be Category:Makeup staff (or something similar) for makeup artists and designers and hairstylists. There certainly are enough articles to substantiate each category. What do ya'll think? --From Andoria with Love 20:53, 31 July 2007 (UTC)
 * Support, but don't forget you have sound editors as well as film editors, etc. I think we'll need to go through all the categories on somewhere like IMDb and make a list of where in our category system each would fit best, creating new cats as required. -- Renegade54 15:50, 3 August 2007 (UTC)
 * Actually, I think we should rename the category Category:Film editors to limit it to those types of editors. Also, I wouldn't want people to start adding editors of books and magazines to it. ;) --From Andoria with Love 02:21, 9 August 2007 (UTC)

More Production staff subs
So, we have a bunch of sub-categories already, but we also have a stack of production staff members in the top-level category still, and more being added on a regular basis. Some other possible sub-cats might be:
 * Gaffers
 * Grips
 * Casting
 * Visual Effects
 * Construction
 * Art department (do these count as designers, or only those who design?)
 * Props (part of art department, and thus "designers" as above, or?)
 * Costumers (do these count as designers, or only those who design?)

Thoughts? -- Sulfur 19:16, 25 November 2007 (UTC)
 * Perhaps we should separate out all the "easy to define" (like Gaffers, Grips, and Construction) production staff into their categories (if it can be populated) first, and then see where we are from there.
 * I'm also unsure if we know whether alot of the art department/costumers were in fact designers, or merely craftsman/tailors in their sections.--Tim Thomason 23:51, 25 January 2008 (UTC)


 * I'm all for sub-cats for Casting Directors and Visual Effects. Everyone else, though, I think can just be grouped in the production staff category. For the record, members in the art department vary from designers to those who just apply what the designers designed. Set decorators and painters, for example, don't design (that I know of). Production designers, art directors, and set designers, on the other, would be counted as designers. Costumers are those responsible for handling the costumes; they do not design anything. --From Andoria with Love 00:08, 26 January 2008 (UTC)

As a followup... we should really sort production staff sub-categories similar to IMDb to make it simpler. Especially since things like "designers" are pretty... vague. :) -- Sulfur 00:30, 26 January 2008 (UTC)


 * I'm for that. For example, we could have separate cats for production designers, art directors, and set decorators, and then lump all the others together as "art department members" or "art department staff." Also, costume designers would get their own cats, costumer department members would get their own, etc. I like it; make it so. :) --From Andoria with Love 00:34, 26 January 2008 (UTC)

Production Staff Category Tree
Here's my suggested new category layout as per IMDb stuff would be as follows (it isn't quite exactly the same, but pretty similar, so don't complain too much):


 * Category:Production staff
 * Category:Art department (construction, props, set dressers, set decorators, etc)
 * Category:Art directors
 * Category:Production designers
 * Category:Casting department
 * Category:Camera and electrical department (grips, gaffers, camera staff, electricians, etc)
 * Category:Cinematographers
 * Category:Costume department
 * Category:Costume designers
 * Category:Directors
 * Category:Assistant and second unit directors
 * Category:Film editors (editors, assistants, etc)
 * Category:Makeup staff (hair stylists, makeup, etc)
 * Category:Music department (musicians, conductors, orchestrators, music editors, etc)
 * Category:Composers
 * Category:Producers
 * Category:Sound department (foley artists, adr, sound editors, etc)
 * Category:Special and Visual effects staff
 * Category:ILM production staff
 * Category:Stunt department (coordinators, riggers, etc)
 * Category:Stunt performers (we already have this one...)
 * Category:Writers

Everyone that doesn't fit into the above list (script supervisors, accountants, transportation staff, and so forth). -- Sulfur 01:07, 26 January 2008 (UTC)


 * I think we can get rid of the designers category altogether. That one wasn't really thought out since there are many people on a film who design but do not have "designer" in their title.
 * I think costume and production designers, art directors and set decorators can be sub-cats of production staff alone, outside of the art department cat. However, if you were to include them in there, it wouldn't be that big of a deal.
 * The rest of it looks good, though. Don't forget one for second unit and assistant directors, though. ;) --From Andoria with Love 01:25, 26 January 2008 (UTC)

In terms of musicians... whoops. Fixed in the list above. Other things addressed above too. I think that set decorators should just be considered art department. The designers and directors were intended to be separate, since they're further up the food chain (so to speak), and those, I think, belong in the art department, since, strictly speaking... that's sorta what they do. But that's just me. -- Sulfur 01:30, 26 January 2008 (UTC)


 * I support the layout as it is now. :) --From Andoria with Love 01:46, 26 January 2008 (UTC)
 * I oppose any other layouts than this one.--Tim Thomason 01:49, 26 January 2008 (UTC)
 * Feeling supportive today. --Jörg 16:52, 27 January 2008 (UTC)