I remember seeing a thread about this before but can't find it

Do these people get a Visual Effects credit or because the visual effect credit applies to the company name (you don't know what the people credited under it actually did) they should not be credited

Quoting CalebAndCo:

Quote:
It seems clear to me the Visual Effects credit applies to those named, who work for ILM.

I agree

Quoting T!M:

Quote:
While I agree that these people deserve a "visual effects" credit, I can't help noticing that the last time we discussed this, everybody agreed that they should not be entered. The difference, is, of course, that back then we were talking about a rather large bunch of unknowns, listed deep down in the end credits in a film that already had plenty of valid "visual effects supervisors". Here we have three fairly well-known names, and I'm assuming that these are the only (or else certainly the main) visual effects-related credits in this particular film. Apparently, that makes all the difference. Not that I don't agree with that, mind you, but generally, this forum community isn't exactly known for being able to make subtle distinctions that.

One correction: everybody the more vocal persons on the forums agreed that they should not be entered

I would have no hesitation entering those as Visual Effects credits. 

I almost never have problems with credits from the opening credits (where this seems to originate).
If the filmmakers considered this bunch important enough to be mentioned in the main-credits and not somewhere deep down below, who am I to disagree.

Quoting m.cellophane:

Quote:
Quoting T!M:

Quote:
While I agree that these people deserve a "visual effects" credit, I can't help noticing that the last time we discussed this, everybody agreed that they should not be entered. The difference, is, of course, that back then we were talking about a rather large bunch of unknowns, listed deep down in the end credits in a film that already had plenty of valid "visual effects supervisors". Here we have three fairly well-known names, and I'm assuming that these are the only (or else certainly the main) visual effects-related credits in this particular film. Apparently, that makes all the difference. Not that I don't agree with that, mind you, but generally, this forum community isn't exactly known for being able to make subtle distinctions that.

I would like to see this discussion. I can't get the search function to work even in a crappy manner right now though...

Same here. If I've got some more time, I'll try to track it down. I can provide you with an example of what we were talking about then, though. That was something like this, from deep down in the end credits - would you credit all these as well? Back then, the consensus was that we shouldn't, since we've got no idea what these people actually did. Theoretically, this list could include pretty much everyone at "Mr. X Inc.", including the caterer and the cleaning lady - we just don't know. For the record: this isn't from a particularly effects-heavy film at all. And if you look up some of these people (example), you'll find that many of them are really "Digital Compositors" and the like - jobs we definitely wouldn't track if their job was further specified.

Quoting m.cellophane:

Quote:
Quoting T!M:

Quote:
would you credit all these as well?

Thanks for the pic. Yes.

If I bothered to do crew... I would as well. If they are all credited for something allowed in the chart... then they should all get credited in my opinion.

Well, I wouldn't enter the bunch of people from my example, simply because they didn't do any of the jobs we track (as I just explained, most are "Digital Compositors"). I'm also quite confident that I'm not entirely alone in that opinion: not only was that the consensus when we last discussed it, but a quick glance through the database shows that virtually nobody ever enters these people, while the actual visual effects supervisors we are after are consistently entered.

So we're back to the age-old example of when a TV show's "script editor" is credited as "editor" - do we then enter him as "film editor"? I, for one, do not. My knowledge that that guy isn't the guy we're after for that field trumps the label. This, to me, is no different. All in all, as I predicted, the forum community isn't exactly known for being able to make subtle distinctions like this, but luckily the bulk of the actual contributing users do seem to have that ability.