Quoting Kathy:

Quote:
I've brought this point up before but feel it is important and relevant to this argument.

I know that it is only an addition of a single letter "s" but "Directors", "Editors", "Producers" etc. is NOT listed in the Crew Chart.

Therefore, based on your premiss that "if it isn't in the chart, don't include it." any Crew listed above would not be allowed.

I know that "common sense" tells me that these person(s) should be allowed. But...

Common sense tells me the same thing, just as common sense tells me that Photographic Special Effects Supervisor is just a specific type of Special Effects Supervisor, so should be included.

Where I am confused, and it is the reason I made my post, is how an Executive Visual Effects Supervisor is the same as a Visual Effects Supervisor as common sense tells me that they are two different job titles, not variations of the same job title.  I am not trying to be argumentative, though it might be coming off that way, I am honestly trying to understand.

Quoting TheMadMartian:

Quote:
Executive Producer and Producer are different jobs...they each have their own section.  Why, then, would we assume the opposite for Executive Visual Effects Supervisor and Visual Effects Supervisor?

Maybe because we don't have different sections for the Visual Effects crew. All Visual Effects, Digital Effects Supervisors/Designers etc are all lumped together under Visual Effects.

Quote:
As for making it easier, it doesn't get any easier than "if it isn't in the chart, don't include it."

A while ago we had a discussion on Prosthetics that amounted to the same argument. Well, I took on board everything you said in that discussion and from that point onward I only include a Prosthetics entry if the word Prosthetics is followed by Make-up Effects Artist. Now, you may disagree with me (and many, many other contributors) including Prosthetic 'anything' but to leave them out would be utterly ridiculous. As far as I am concerned a Prosthetic Make-up Effects Artist should be listed just as much (if not more so) than a Make-up Effects Artist.
Likewise, Make-up Supervisor, is not listed in the rules but it gets included because of the Supervisor rule. Maybe we need Ken to weigh in on every decision.

Quote:
If Executive Visual Effects Supervisor, is just an extension of Visual Effects Supervisor, why isn't Visual Effects Art Director just an extension of Visual Effects?

  Because Visual Effects and Art Direction are two different sections in the rules of course. Once again I refer you back to the Supervising Producer situation where many people argued it should not be included (along with Supervising Art Director, for God's sake!!!) and Invelos ruled that all Supervisors should be included. I see this situation as no different.

However, Kinematics information is the best argument for not including these entries; but, once again, this required either a better knowledge of the film industry OR the desire to do an internet search; and given that many contributors can't even be bothered to check what their submitting against the disc can you really see them taking the time to do this?

Thanks for explaining your position.  Not everybody cares enough to spend the time doing so, so I really do appreciate it.  I may not agree with all of it, but I do better understand where you are coming from.

Quoting Pantheon:

Quote:
Quoting TheMadMartian:

Quote:
just as common sense tells me that Photographic Special Effects Supervisor is just a specific type of Special Effects Supervisor, so should be included.

But, according to you, it's not in the crew chart so musn't be included.

No, you misunderstood my statement.  That is what a strict reading of the rules say, and for the average user, that is fairly easy to follow.  It is not, however, my personal opinion on the matter.  My personal opinion is summed up, fairly well, in the statement you quoted.

I actually think we are pretty close to being on the same page, we just differ a little on what constitutes a variation of a credit.